Next on Hardball: Casuals vs Hardcore; Does Kel’Thuzad Hate America?
If you don’t like Flash movies, here’s my HANDY RECAP. Note that I have not made up ONE SINGLE QUOTE.
Greg Vederman: “It’s against the terms of service!”
Julian Dibbell: “The whole idea of cheating is bogus!”
Vederman: “It is cheating, because the rules say not to do that!”
Dibbell: “Blizzard can put in a rule to say you have to be a Pastafarian, but that doesn’t mean you will!”
Vederman: “Julian, you’re wrong!”
Dibbell: “The idea that these are competitive games are absurd! They’re collaborative games!”
Vederman: (rolls eyes) “The fact of the matter is, it’s against the Terms of Service!”
G4: “Isn’t it.. uh, incentivized?”
Vederman: “In WoW, it is expressly forgiven!”
G4: “Here’s my issue. A “friend of mine” paid to be powerlevelled to level 30. It should be a crime! If you want to support a sweatshop…”
Dibbell: (rolls eyes)
G4: “Julian, some people on some of those gaming blogs paint a picture of a sweatshop, you know, a guy with a black mask cracking a whip….”
Dibbell: (snickers)
G4: “… but you’ve actually worked in one! What are the conditions like? Should they be banned for being so deplorable?”
Dibbell: “Nononononono. These guys are gamers. They’re not, like conscript armies of peasants, forced to whack orcs all day long. Twelve hours a day, one day off a month…”
Vederman: “SOUNDS AWESOME!”
Dibbell: “If you have a problem with this, you don’t have a problem with gold farming, you have a problem with the global capitalist order.”
Vederman: “You know what I got a problem with, buddy? There are six million players in World of Warcraft! Most of them don’t want this, despite what the G4 poll says!”
Dibbell: (shrugs)
Vederman: “And concievably, they’re going to be taxed! Because their money, their gold in WoW, which should not have a monetary value, does… because of people like YOU!”
G4: “Greg, how dare you discredit our G4 poll!”
So, basically, today we’ve learned that the issues of importance to the MMO community can be made as banally trivial as much more important issues! The progress brings a single tear to my eye, truly.
It is pretty sad that they talk over eachother like some political talk radio show. There should be a “turn based” system, like debates use. I just can’t take all that shouting, but I thought other then that, it was well done, and it was rather informing. (And funny too!)
I mentioned in a recent long-winded post on OverModerated that RMT taps into a very basic globalization concept, and consumer perception is the primary point of contention.
Kathy Lee Gifford no longer does swift business in ladies garments, but Wal-Mart certainly turns record profits. The difference? Perception. When the community luminaries set their laser-like attention towards the effect (the farmers) rather than the cause (demand and initial design), the focus is shifted and the buck is passed.
Julian Dibbell really, really needs to die.
No. Today we have learned the G4 is stupid.
The part that gets me is the end, where the G4 drone is talking about a developer creating an item that’s needed to ‘continue playing the game’, and charging for it.
Y’know, that isn’t very far from what EA is doing RIGHT NOW with their Xbox 360 titles. Yeah, right now they’re only charging for cheats…but how long until part of the game is locked until you purchase it?
Lumines Live, anyone?
RMT taps into a very basic globalization concept, and consumer perception is the primary point of contention.
My objection to RMT in games where it’s forbidden isn’t based on perception. It’s an objective standard: The people involved have broken their word for fun and/or profit.
People who’ve demonstrated they won’t respect an explicit contract are not my first choice as partners in games that involve implied social contracts. (As all multiplayer games do, no matter what their design.)
G4: \’e2\’80\’9cIsn\’e2\’80\’99t it.. uh, incentivized?\’e2\’80\’9d
Who was that? How DARE they say something intelligent and insightful in a debate on gold farming. That is expressly against the Gold Farming Debate TOS!
Is it just me, or does Vederman come off in this like a whiney D&D rules lawyer type?
@TPRJones, yes, yes he does.
also, I’ve already played some Korean games where you need to pay money to get past a certain point and continue playing.
protip: consumers arent THAT dumb yet, people quit these games when they realize that the developer is trying to screw them.
While, the arguement that “It’s agains the Terms of Service” is the most boring. It’s the most valid plus, it’s the underlying foundation for several compounding arguments against RMT. In the past, it was a risky transaction. Prone to Fraud. Also, Farmers where constalty interupting the basic players. They would horde camps and take away popular hunting spots, disrupting other players game play. And a general discouragement to see goods being sold in ebay for real money. Which is more of an ethical issue then it is something damaging to the game.
Now, we’re already seeing some ‘damage’ from this kind of trading. WoW is going to have new features you can unlock in the online game by getting special cards in it’s collectable card game. What some may say is just a step closer to developes charging you to finaly get the “okay” sword of heck. Which is the affordable version of the “Ubah” Sword of doom, what’s declaried the necessary weapon to be part of any Raids.
Sounds good to me. If players really cared about RMT, they wouldn’t pay 180 bucks a year to play games with RMT.
[quote]People who\’e2\’80\’99ve demonstrated they won\’e2\’80\’99t respect an explicit contract are not my first choice as partners in games that involve implied social contracts.[/quote]
By explicit contract, I take it you are referring to the overwhelmingly broad End-User License Agreement? Precious few MMOs actually include sections specifically defining exclusion of RMT in these, and the majority of them are so broadly interpretted as to border hilarity.
Take a good long read of the WoW EULA sometime. Some of the sections in there could be easily interpretted as expressly forbidding any modification of the user-interface, which is a part of the “Game”. Section 4 could be interpretted as a prohibition against nearly all comprehensive WoW fansites.
From the WoW ToU: (the one you can’t play the game without agreeing to)
Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize any property claims outside of World of Warcraft or the purported sale, gift or trade in the “real world” of anything related to World of Warcraft. Accordingly, you may not sell items for “real” money or exchange items outside of World of Warcraft.
That’s pretty explicit.
Another reason why live media isn’t a good mix for videogames.
I just can’t get over that some people actually watch G4.
Man, those guys really are pretty poor debaters.
Both of them need to stick to better arguements.
Dibbell could’ve better pointed out that MMO developers do not make envoirnments that are indicative of their rules, and that developers are terrible at enforcing their own policies. It’s not his fault people WANT to be powerleveled!
Vederman didn’t even bother to shoot down Dibbell’s horrible example of MMOs being like crossword puzzles. It’s easy to point out that, indeed, people ARE competing against eachother: for virtual space to level up and earn loot! Gold farmers can effectively control a large portion of the best spaces and eliminate any chances for real gamers to enjoy the content. All progress can be prevented and all forms of earning currency and items become restricted, possibly to the point that it becomes a necessity to buy from farmers.
Damnit, they should’ve put ME on the show! I’d put these guys to shame.
Freakazoid: Your job is to kill Julian Dibbell.
This must be done. It is your desssstiny.
I could argue with myself better than those idiots.
The way I see it, Dibbell was the only one in the “debate” who actually has brains and probably uncomfortable with screaming down people therefore confined to shrug, eyeroll, or whatever non-verbal means of expression.