"Suits" are always the villains. Corporate-fascism is murdering our Democracy and should be fought to the last gasp of the last fighter.
Published in 1952 and largely forgotten....
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
There are some villains in every industry...but one should not take the actions of a few as the actions of everyone in any field.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
Originally posted by Channce Typical progressive talking point, everyone who has made it to a higher level (excluding themselves) is some sort of evil person. Oh, they also exclude actors, musicians, corrupt politicians that play to them and athletes.
The "suits" are not the people who make it to a "higher level". This idea is really exactly the problem. Many "suits" are in no way more successful than many devs.
**snip for length**
This doesn't mean that things like marketing and advertising etc are not important. Of course they are. But if you have a guy with a marketing degree with the power to override or change scope on your dev manager then you are 9/10 times going to see a clusterfuck. Its like having a chimp being able to control what Einstein should be researching. Again that doesn't mean you ignore marketing or that there shouldn't be compromises for marketing/advertising concerns.
Anyone who thinks that some Pres or VP of marketing or accounts is on a "higher level" than a guy with multiple profitable games produced over a 20 year career is basically living in la la land. Doesn't mean that really good producer/dev always knows what will make money, but the idea that those "suits" are on a "higher level" is risable.
I don't disagree, but the problem is that the term 'suits' is an over-generalized term to begin with. As are the terms 'evil' and 'villain'. They would be more applicable if life behaved like an anime, but it does not. Things aren't that black and white.
That was one of my points but it's all we hear from devs after launches and xpak releases. "It sucks cause the powers made us..."
"Suits" are always the villains. Corporate-fascism is murdering our Democracy and should be fought to the last gasp of the last fighter.
Really? You prefer to live in the stone age?
You know that without corporations (and suits), we won't have smart phones, computers, the internet, electricity, and even cheap groceries, right?
The last time when corporations were defeated by communism in the sovient union and China, the results did not really turn out that well, did it?
Corporations existed and ran things in 1917? I did not know that... must have slept through that chapter of History According to General Motors.
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
Dwight D. Eisenhower -- 1959
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I knew the OP would be eaten alive. People on these forums are so clueless.
It was hilarious that someone in the thread suggested that the devs behind torchlight left bliZard to be able to be creative?! So they left blizzard and created an exact clone of diablo 2. Omg the creativity. I can't believe some of thebullshit developers feed players and the players actually believe it.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Gaming was always a profit oriented industry Jt was never a nonprofit one. I seriously can't beleive the things I am reading in this thread. I really curious about the education and kind of jobs people posting in this thread have.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
"Suits" are always the villains. Corporate-fascism is murdering our Democracy and should be fought to the last gasp of the last fighter.
Really? You prefer to live in the stone age?
You know that without corporations (and suits), we won't have smart phones, computers, the internet, electricity, and even cheap groceries, right?
The last time when corporations were defeated by communism in the sovient union and China, the results did not really turn out that well, did it?
Corporations existed and ran things in 1917? I did not know that... must have slept through that chapter of History According to General Motors.
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
Dwight D. Eisenhower -- 1959
Wise words, it looks however, like he was entirely correct.
Originally posted by fivoroth Gaming was always a profit oriented industry Jt was never a nonprofit one. I seriously can't beleive the things I am reading in this thread. I really curious about the education and kind of jobs people posting in this thread have.
Everyone understands that and it's not what we're debating.
The line gets blurred when devs go from making games they themselves enjoy, to making ones that are designed for quantity instead of quality. That's where the corporate culture invades and suits get involved.
Originally posted by fivoroth Gaming was always a profit oriented industry Jt was never a nonprofit one. I seriously can't beleive the things I am reading in this thread. I really curious about the education and kind of jobs people posting in this thread have.
Everyone understands that and it's not what we're debating.
The line gets blurred when devs go from making games they themselves enjoy, to making ones that are designed for quantity instead of quality. That's where the corporate culture invades and suits get involved.
Devs making games which they themselves enjoy? How do you even measure that? Developers who are producing current generation MMOs might really enjoy them. It's players speculating that this is not the case. There also can be 100 people working on the development. Does it mean they will all agree with game development decisions? Of course not. It's very subjective to say.
An MMO is an ongoing ever changing game. You can always do something more before you release. But you need to draw the line at some point. If I am investing say 50-100m into an MMO, I am expecting certain returns. MMOs are extremely risky so I will be expecting higher returns. 5% return investment? Might as well put my money in government bonds and earn more with significantly less risk. Payback also take ages.
Now you can argue that MMOs can be developed with really small budgets (not AAA) but MMO players expect sso much. They are really picky on what they will spend, they are holding onto their money as if WW3 is going to happen any minute now. Also they are not tolerant of issues which are associated with low budget indie games - things like bugs, not having tons of content at launch, server issues etc. SO players are expecting AAA quality but they don't want to deal with the investment side of it. It's ultimately investors who make these games happen. Why should I invest in an MMO game development company with such high risks, uncertain returns? Of course, you need to please your shareholders. No shareholders, no games.
Quantity over quality? As in numbers of players or content? If my game is only going to be played by 50k people, might as well not develop the game. Every company (it doesn't matter the industry) seeks to please both its customers and its shareholders. Are the needs of shareholders sometimes given more weight? Yes but ultimately there is nothing wrong with that. Shareholders own the company so ultimately it is to serve them.
I am coming from a very business focused perspective. I work in finance and business and I am really focused on company performance. You want to satisfy your customers as much as possible but there is always a trade off that has to be made. This is why you get business people to make business decisions. Because usually engineers, IT people and game developers simply lack the experience or knowledge to successfully manage a large corporation. It's shoking how many people work in large corporations and don't understand basic concepts behind how their business run. YOu mention profit margins, fixed/variable costs/financing decisions and they look at you as if you are from a different planet. Those poeple can't run a large scale business.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
The line gets blurred when devs go from making games they themselves enjoy, to making ones that are designed for quantity instead of quality. That's where the corporate culture invades and suits get involved.
and there is no AAA quality if not for the suits. You can't have polish, details and production values without millions and millions of investment, and you can raise/manage that kind of resources without suits.
If you prefer games made in garage by 3 people, it is your prerogative. But I like games like Diablo 3, Dishonored, Dead Space, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex Human Evolution ... and so on .. and none of those games will be possible without suits.
Originally posted by fivoroth Gaming was always a profit oriented industry Jt was never a nonprofit one. I seriously can't beleive the things I am reading in this thread. I really curious about the education and kind of jobs people posting in this thread have.
Everyone understands that and it's not what we're debating.
The line gets blurred when devs go from making games they themselves enjoy, to making ones that are designed for quantity instead of quality. That's where the corporate culture invades and suits get involved.
If you have quantity you can't have quality and vice versa?
Come on alders..
The fact is if suits are villains then so is each and every one of you in this thread. If you are in any shape or form pondering where your money should go on a day-to-day basis, weighing how to use your limited resources so that you may get the most value out of it... You are just like any "suit" with the only exception that your money has much, much less influence on the rest of us (though it still has a massive influence, just not an immediately apparent one).
It's their money as much as your money is yours, and unless you think other people should have a say in how you spend your resources, you are a massive hypocrite if you think you should have a say in how these suits spend theirs. Especially if said demands boil down to "make video games I like baww" rather than "help the poor" or whatever.
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Originally posted by fivoroth I knew the OP would be eaten alive. People on these forums are so clueless.
It was hilarious that someone in the thread suggested that the devs behind torchlight left bliZard to be able to be creative?! So they left blizzard and created an exact clone of diablo 2. Omg the creativity. I can't believe some of thebullshit developers feed players and the players actually believe it.
How was I eaten alive? Take a reading course. People are reluctant to start discussion because bitchy lil bitches like you troll them. Your post added nothing here. How many of your 3000 bitchy posts were worth reading?
Arrogant suits are screwing up everything they lay their hands on... games are the least of the problem.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Arrogant suits are screwing up everything they lay their hands on... games are the least of the problem.
Trying to change the subject, uh? No one says things are exactly like 1602 ... but hey there is a commonality .. corporation existed then and they exist now, unlike someone who "slept through" history lessons may have thought.
So do you agree that corporations existed before 1917?
Arrogant suits are screwing up everything they lay their hands on... games are the least of the problem.
Trying to change the subject, uh? No one says things are exactly like 1602 ... but hey there is a commonality .. corporation existed then and they exist now, unlike someone who "slept through" history lessons may have thought.
So do you agree that corporations existed before 1917?
Ok, let's do get back to your original subject... do you believe those dirty bolsheviks deposed corporations in 1917 or was it perhaps the Tzar? And did that, in your opinion, trigger a new stone age in Russia?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
"Suits" are always the villains. Corporate-fascism is murdering our Democracy and should be fought to the last gasp of the last fighter.
One side of the red team/blue team brainwashing dichotomy of the USA will say that the "suits" are the private people and/or people who chase money and claim they have taken over the government.
The other side of the brainwashing dichotomy will say that the government is trying to control "private" business (in one way or another).
But if you believe that there is in fact "Corporate-facism" then you must admit that there is no functional way to distinguish between public and private as that is the entire point of the "fascism" part. If think they edifice is bad then you must either admit government is not solving the problems you wish it did or you must admit that in many cases "private" industry is not really any such thing and "free" markets are not making things better because if there is a corporate-facism there is not a free market but instead a collection of cartels.
Further we have a chicken and the egg problem. Is it that the gonvernment and various regulatory bodies were infiltrated by corporate shills or was it the other way around, the corporation were infiltrated by government shills? The fact of the matter is that in key industries the overlap between various big players and various regulators is ridiculous. Just look at banking and finance to see this. But if you absolutely cannot answer in any real way which "side" is to blame. You can't even identify a side. They are inseparable. Sure you may ostensibly work for the SEC but if you worked for Goldman-Sachs 2 years ago and will be working for Goldman-sach 2 years from now and had worked at the Department of Treasury 4 years ago. Then which side are you on? That scenario of jobs/influences is not even close to uncommon or peculiar right now. Its quite obvious to anyone who pays attention that bank like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs have huge influence over the Federal Reserve, there are 50 hours of taped conversations showing how much inlfuence GS has over the NY fed. The head of the NY fed is a former GS head honcho. Since the Fed controls the creation of currency, this is kind of a Big Deal since this affects all aspects of the economy and therefore politics.
Thus if you believe what the blue team tells you then many important aspects of the their rhetoric become invalid. If you believe what the red team is telling you then many important aspects of their rhetoric become invalid.
So if we stipulate that there is in fact some sort of fascism (of some degree) involved here (which I am fine with), then the really important question is:
Why are both teams lying to you about it? Why do they insist on maintaining a false dichotomy? Are they simply living in the past? Fighting an idealogical war that has passed them by? Or is this central to their means of influencing people's behavior?
No, the things in 1602 were much worse...you know, the times when the wealthy were not just rich but privilegded by law of absolute monarchy. Since then we moved onto consituonal monarchy, republic and the book you talk about that could be publsihed without being considered criminal offense.
In my fifty years of existence... I have met and dealt with many of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
edit: If you are unfamiliar with the term asshole as in association with the words Jerk, Prick or Dirty Rotten Scoundrel. I would have to rephrase my comment as
Jerks, Pricks and Dirty Rotten Scoundrels Come in All Colors
Originally posted by Phry Microsoft is probably a really good example of what happens when the suits get too much influence, while they are obviously well known for their operating systems, their main business is in office software, thats not to say that the 'suits' haven't had an effect on operating systems either though, but more on that in just a second, Office software is a big earner for Microsoft, its also virtually the only part of the company that remains profitable, their latest idea is to make it even more so, now instead of selling their office software, which included licences for companies based on concurrent numbers using it etc, they now have a 'rental' of to put it another way, subscription model, that really is on a per user basis but overall rather than concurrent, because, you make more money that way, its really not very pretty.But back to their operating systems, for a while Microsoft has been trying to do the itunes thing, with Windows and Xbox live etc, a market place where customers of both their Console and PC platforms could purchase games etc, it wasn't very good at what it did and people tended to avoid where possible, but now, they have gone one step further, by incorporating it into the Operating System, with Win 8, the store front is literally the first thing you log into when you boot up, and with Win 10 its projected that their XB1 and PC OS's will be even closer aligned, its not about convenience or being user friendly, its just a way of trying to bring the Microsoft storefront into the home, its only ever really been about $$, its a bit like spam emails, if you send out enough of them, then you'll probably generate a few sales, and by Microsoft putting the windows store on everybody's or at least trying to, startup screen, their hoping to make a few $$ through app sales, its a bit like the itunes model, and MS wants their piece.
...where do you get all that false info from, lol?
" Office software is a big earner for Microsoft, its also virtually the only part of the company that remains profitable"
" their latest idea is to make it even more so, now instead of selling their office software, which included licences for companies based on concurrent numbers using it etc, they now have a 'rental' of to put it another way, subscription model, that really is on a per user basis but overall rather than concurrent"
I know this has probably been said, but i wanted to put my 2 cents in, and make it brief:
"Suits" are not intrinsically evil. They are there to make money off their investments, thats all. They will go about that in whatever way they think is going to get them a significant return on their investment.
For artistic/entertainment mediums, those two ideas are generally do not coincide. Creativitiy and artistic expression may or may not sell well.
What suits have done is stifle innovation by forcing developers to make games in such a manner as to produce excellent sales, and produce a return on the "suits" investment. Generally the "suits" utilize the method that has been in use in the popular music industry for decades now, which is to identify and follow a formula. The sad reality is humanity in general responds to these things and they are almost always a surefire way to get people to buy something, regardless of actual quality.
Anyways, my 2 cents /shrug.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
Without the suits you wouldn't get AAA MMORPGs with more innovation, you would get almost no AAA quality MMORPGs at all. (you'd probably see some successfully crowdfunded midsize budget ones though)
Or you focus on more innovative small budget games, that market ofcourse already exists.
Originally posted by Loktofeit You seem to be under the impression that making a game to make money wasn't their main plan. Maybe you're right. I think get the feeling it was a big part of it, though. Who knows. And Mythic could hardly be considered a 'big house' when it had a payroll of two dozen, no? And do we really want to go into the whole Origin/EA thing? Who knows what UO2, Privateer Online or Harry Potter Online could have been, right?Then there's also the matter of whether or not those MMOs were good or if we've just got our rose-tinted goggles on.
I am not trying to say "Games should be free." However, there is a difference between profit and PROFIT. As an example, I have yet to meet a lawyer worth $50/hour, let alone $300/hour. That, to me, is outright robbery. The same for games. Please make money so you can produce more games. But this is different from making enough for the third house in the Hamptons. It is not about making money or not, for me, but rather how much and how "important" that is.
Please, don't throw out the asinine "nostalgia goggles" comment. Just because a person happens to like something someone else does not, usually "older" or a "precursor" does not automatically mean they wear "nostalgia goggles", though they may be. Were old MMORPGS "perfect?" Of course not. Did I enjoy my many years of logging in almost everyday? You bet your sweet ass. There is some nostalgia for me with EQ1 since it was my first one and the very idea of playing the same game with so many other players from around the world was all new and amazing. It was far from perfect for me. But then there was City of Heroes and World of Warcraft (pre-Cata) that I also enjoyed many years playing. No nostalgia there. Not one iota.
Again, my main gripe with "Suits" is that it is their job, career, to make as much profit as possible with the least amount of risk. Without risk, creativity is snuffed out. Suits, by their very existence stifle the gaming industry. Again, make money doing "what you love." Just stop trying to put your whole family through college, or getting that third Rolls Royce in the 4-car garage with each and every game.
Profit is good. It keeps good companies in business to continue "creating." Greed is bad because making money is THE top priority, not creativity.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Comments
Published in 1952 and largely forgotten....
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
That was one of my points but it's all we hear from devs after launches and xpak releases. "It sucks cause the powers made us..."
Really? You prefer to live in the stone age?
You know that without corporations (and suits), we won't have smart phones, computers, the internet, electricity, and even cheap groceries, right?
The last time when corporations were defeated by communism in the sovient union and China, the results did not really turn out that well, did it?
Corporations existed and ran things in 1917? I did not know that... must have slept through that chapter of History According to General Motors.
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
Dwight D. Eisenhower -- 1959
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
It was hilarious that someone in the thread suggested that the devs behind torchlight left bliZard to be able to be creative?! So they left blizzard and created an exact clone of diablo 2. Omg the creativity. I can't believe some of thebullshit developers feed players and the players actually believe it.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Wise words, it looks however, like he was entirely correct.
Corporations exist since Roman era, and probably date even long before
Everyone understands that and it's not what we're debating.
The line gets blurred when devs go from making games they themselves enjoy, to making ones that are designed for quantity instead of quality. That's where the corporate culture invades and suits get involved.
Devs making games which they themselves enjoy? How do you even measure that? Developers who are producing current generation MMOs might really enjoy them. It's players speculating that this is not the case. There also can be 100 people working on the development. Does it mean they will all agree with game development decisions? Of course not. It's very subjective to say.
An MMO is an ongoing ever changing game. You can always do something more before you release. But you need to draw the line at some point. If I am investing say 50-100m into an MMO, I am expecting certain returns. MMOs are extremely risky so I will be expecting higher returns. 5% return investment? Might as well put my money in government bonds and earn more with significantly less risk. Payback also take ages.
Now you can argue that MMOs can be developed with really small budgets (not AAA) but MMO players expect sso much. They are really picky on what they will spend, they are holding onto their money as if WW3 is going to happen any minute now. Also they are not tolerant of issues which are associated with low budget indie games - things like bugs, not having tons of content at launch, server issues etc. SO players are expecting AAA quality but they don't want to deal with the investment side of it. It's ultimately investors who make these games happen. Why should I invest in an MMO game development company with such high risks, uncertain returns? Of course, you need to please your shareholders. No shareholders, no games.
Quantity over quality? As in numbers of players or content? If my game is only going to be played by 50k people, might as well not develop the game. Every company (it doesn't matter the industry) seeks to please both its customers and its shareholders. Are the needs of shareholders sometimes given more weight? Yes but ultimately there is nothing wrong with that. Shareholders own the company so ultimately it is to serve them.
I am coming from a very business focused perspective. I work in finance and business and I am really focused on company performance. You want to satisfy your customers as much as possible but there is always a trade off that has to be made. This is why you get business people to make business decisions. Because usually engineers, IT people and game developers simply lack the experience or knowledge to successfully manage a large corporation. It's shoking how many people work in large corporations and don't understand basic concepts behind how their business run. YOu mention profit margins, fixed/variable costs/financing decisions and they look at you as if you are from a different planet. Those poeple can't run a large scale business.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Have you heard of the Dutch East India Company, formed in 1602? It is just ONE out of the many examples.
Yeah .. you must have slept through history classes.
and there is no AAA quality if not for the suits. You can't have polish, details and production values without millions and millions of investment, and you can raise/manage that kind of resources without suits.
If you prefer games made in garage by 3 people, it is your prerogative. But I like games like Diablo 3, Dishonored, Dead Space, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex Human Evolution ... and so on .. and none of those games will be possible without suits.
If you have quantity you can't have quality and vice versa?
Come on alders..
The fact is if suits are villains then so is each and every one of you in this thread. If you are in any shape or form pondering where your money should go on a day-to-day basis, weighing how to use your limited resources so that you may get the most value out of it... You are just like any "suit" with the only exception that your money has much, much less influence on the rest of us (though it still has a massive influence, just not an immediately apparent one).
It's their money as much as your money is yours, and unless you think other people should have a say in how you spend your resources, you are a massive hypocrite if you think you should have a say in how these suits spend theirs. Especially if said demands boil down to "make video games I like baww" rather than "help the poor" or whatever.
How was I eaten alive? Take a reading course. People are reluctant to start discussion because bitchy lil bitches like you troll them. Your post added nothing here. How many of your 3000 bitchy posts were worth reading?
Yeah. It's why books like Gangs of America: The Rise of Corporate Power and the Disabling of Democracy are written. Because things today are just like they were in 1602
Arrogant suits are screwing up everything they lay their hands on... games are the least of the problem.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Trying to change the subject, uh? No one says things are exactly like 1602 ... but hey there is a commonality .. corporation existed then and they exist now, unlike someone who "slept through" history lessons may have thought.
So do you agree that corporations existed before 1917?
Ok, let's do get back to your original subject... do you believe those dirty bolsheviks deposed corporations in 1917 or was it perhaps the Tzar? And did that, in your opinion, trigger a new stone age in Russia?
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
One side of the red team/blue team brainwashing dichotomy of the USA will say that the "suits" are the private people and/or people who chase money and claim they have taken over the government.
The other side of the brainwashing dichotomy will say that the government is trying to control "private" business (in one way or another).
But if you believe that there is in fact "Corporate-facism" then you must admit that there is no functional way to distinguish between public and private as that is the entire point of the "fascism" part. If think they edifice is bad then you must either admit government is not solving the problems you wish it did or you must admit that in many cases "private" industry is not really any such thing and "free" markets are not making things better because if there is a corporate-facism there is not a free market but instead a collection of cartels.
Further we have a chicken and the egg problem. Is it that the gonvernment and various regulatory bodies were infiltrated by corporate shills or was it the other way around, the corporation were infiltrated by government shills? The fact of the matter is that in key industries the overlap between various big players and various regulators is ridiculous. Just look at banking and finance to see this. But if you absolutely cannot answer in any real way which "side" is to blame. You can't even identify a side. They are inseparable. Sure you may ostensibly work for the SEC but if you worked for Goldman-Sachs 2 years ago and will be working for Goldman-sach 2 years from now and had worked at the Department of Treasury 4 years ago. Then which side are you on? That scenario of jobs/influences is not even close to uncommon or peculiar right now. Its quite obvious to anyone who pays attention that bank like JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs have huge influence over the Federal Reserve, there are 50 hours of taped conversations showing how much inlfuence GS has over the NY fed. The head of the NY fed is a former GS head honcho. Since the Fed controls the creation of currency, this is kind of a Big Deal since this affects all aspects of the economy and therefore politics.
Thus if you believe what the blue team tells you then many important aspects of the their rhetoric become invalid. If you believe what the red team is telling you then many important aspects of their rhetoric become invalid.
So if we stipulate that there is in fact some sort of fascism (of some degree) involved here (which I am fine with), then the really important question is:
Why are both teams lying to you about it? Why do they insist on maintaining a false dichotomy? Are they simply living in the past? Fighting an idealogical war that has passed them by? Or is this central to their means of influencing people's behavior?
No, the things in 1602 were much worse...you know, the times when the wealthy were not just rich but privilegded by law of absolute monarchy. Since then we moved onto consituonal monarchy, republic and the book you talk about that could be publsihed without being considered criminal offense.
A most definite yes
In my fifty years of existence... I have met and dealt with many of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
edit: If you are unfamiliar with the term asshole as in association with the words Jerk, Prick or Dirty Rotten Scoundrel. I would have to rephrase my comment as
Jerks, Pricks and Dirty Rotten Scoundrels Come in All Colors
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
...where do you get all that false info from, lol?
" Office software is a big earner for Microsoft, its also virtually the only part of the company that remains profitable"
" their latest idea is to make it even more so, now instead of selling their office software, which included licences for companies based on concurrent numbers using it etc, they now have a 'rental' of to put it another way, subscription model, that really is on a per user basis but overall rather than concurrent"
I know this has probably been said, but i wanted to put my 2 cents in, and make it brief:
"Suits" are not intrinsically evil. They are there to make money off their investments, thats all. They will go about that in whatever way they think is going to get them a significant return on their investment.
For artistic/entertainment mediums, those two ideas are generally do not coincide. Creativitiy and artistic expression may or may not sell well.
What suits have done is stifle innovation by forcing developers to make games in such a manner as to produce excellent sales, and produce a return on the "suits" investment. Generally the "suits" utilize the method that has been in use in the popular music industry for decades now, which is to identify and follow a formula. The sad reality is humanity in general responds to these things and they are almost always a surefire way to get people to buy something, regardless of actual quality.
Anyways, my 2 cents /shrug.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Without the suits you wouldn't get AAA MMORPGs with more innovation, you would get almost no AAA quality MMORPGs at all. (you'd probably see some successfully crowdfunded midsize budget ones though)
Or you focus on more innovative small budget games, that market ofcourse already exists.
Please, don't throw out the asinine "nostalgia goggles" comment. Just because a person happens to like something someone else does not, usually "older" or a "precursor" does not automatically mean they wear "nostalgia goggles", though they may be. Were old MMORPGS "perfect?" Of course not. Did I enjoy my many years of logging in almost everyday? You bet your sweet ass. There is some nostalgia for me with EQ1 since it was my first one and the very idea of playing the same game with so many other players from around the world was all new and amazing. It was far from perfect for me. But then there was City of Heroes and World of Warcraft (pre-Cata) that I also enjoyed many years playing. No nostalgia there. Not one iota.
Again, my main gripe with "Suits" is that it is their job, career, to make as much profit as possible with the least amount of risk. Without risk, creativity is snuffed out. Suits, by their very existence stifle the gaming industry. Again, make money doing "what you love." Just stop trying to put your whole family through college, or getting that third Rolls Royce in the 4-car garage with each and every game.
Profit is good. It keeps good companies in business to continue "creating." Greed is bad because making money is THE top priority, not creativity.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR