Nowadays you vote with your attention and with your personal information as much as you vote with your wallet.

The only value you have as a consumer is the money you spend. Your voice is your vote, and how you vote with a company that offers goods and services, even digitally, is with your money and whether you choose to buy or not buy goods or services.

If everyone felt that voting with your wallet was irrelevant, which a great deal of people do, than we'd have mega corporations ruling the wor- oh wait we're already there.

You have no power over a corporation other than whether or not you buy its product. Use your power or don't, but I kind of take offense that you singled out my catchphrase specifically.

Do what you want, but don't make fun of others for making use of the little power we have. This is especially true of people who think voting with your wallet is irrelevant. How exactly do you expect to change anything, if you just buy whatever the fuck you want without any thought of ramifications for anyone or anything else?

This is the problem with modern humans. Most of us are just "Me me me me me" in the West and don't give a fuck about anyone or anything. People who feel like they make no difference? GUESS WHAT YOU MAKE NO DIFFERENCE.

It's like the hundreds of millions of people who don't vote because "It doesn't matter". Well duh, if you don't vote, then no, your voice isn't going to be heard!

You guys are pretty adamant about voting with your wallet not mattering, despite the people buying crap games voting with their wallets, and continuing the development of crap games.

I'm going to say one more thing and then I'm done in here.

The end goal of every company is to get your money. Every purchase you make, every cup of coffee you buy, every grocery you get, it's all voting with your wallet. Every. single. thing. you. buy. Every time you get gasoline, the gas station you fill up at? That changes dynamics in the country.

Even your ISP and choice (or lack of) is voting with your wallet.

I strongly encourage every person reading this thread to realize every purchase you make is a vote. Do I buy everything organically or things all created ethically 100% of the time? I'm sure I don't. But I'm at least aware that my samsung is slightly less likely to have used slave labor in its production than an iphone.

SO you can come after my catchphrase all you want, but you're directly shaping the future RIGHT NOW with every thing you buy.

You re legally forbidden to make any STEAM / Origin / UPlay / BN 2.0 and and other DRM client games "your own".
So much to point 1, that ppl are forced to do so is the failure in itself. Since i do consider stuff i legally buy
no matter what, my property and no one should ve the possiblity to interfere with my access to it.

Steam and Co, are like a Hand on your throat all the time, even if they don t squeeze the feeling having it there
is just .... yeah. (methaphorical speaking)

the deltetion of GTA 4s Music was ONLY possible becasue of steams "intrusion" into the game aka a forced patch.
They do not delete your games (yet) but i bet my bloody arse they already have plans for that in the back.
For now it is still illegal to block your access to the game and technical difficult since we still have the files
locally stored on our machines.

But that is about to change, which is my point i am talking about. All the past 10 years, we just supported this.
So we failed to "Vote with our Wallets" already.

Lucky us there are companys like GoG and Devs CDPR, so everybody who like their approach should really
start supporting them with the Money we have, aye?

AKA vote for GoG and CD Projekt RED s approach of pushing out games with your wallet. :D
and any simililar Dev Studio, with the same approach.

That's not really the point I was trying to make. What I was saying is, it's almost impossible for games without microtransactions to compete with those with them, due to how immensely profitable they are.

I don't have anything to back this up, but the people who tend to throw their money away on things like microtransactions are probably rich and don't actually think in terms of worth. So they don't really care about how much a game is worth, they are just enjoying a game with friends and think "Why not drop 100 bucks on this" because 100 bucks is pocket change for them. Really, they don't have more investment in the game than any 'regular' person who paid 60 bucks for it.... Basically, I am saying they are ironically 'casual' players.

With that in mind, I'll make a very far-fetched uneducated guess off of that first assumption based on nothing at all.... And assume that those people are also the people who are most likely to NOT care about video games at some point and spend their money elsewhere. The moment the 'rich casuals' get bored of video games (and they will since all microtransaction-laden games are mostly looter shooters or gacha games, as those work perfectly for this model), publishers will be too slow to readjust back to the 'real' fans who have now been conditioned to not even think of modern video games being worth $60 and wait 12-36 months before picking up a game.

When that happens, the smaller studios you voted for that create games you liked won't have any trouble readjusting. In fact, they won't be readjusting at all, it'll just be business as usual where 50k copies at $15 a pop is a success. On the other hand, if you join the mainstream crowd and everyone gets bored, the money that you could have used to vote for the 'normal' studios survival will have gone to waste. So if anything you are voting whether or not there should be a complete and utter collapse of video games, or just a collapse of big publishers who are all releasing the same game with the same business model.

But really, don't even worry about voting with your wallet. Just buy whatever you like and pay only a slight bit of attention to who you are buying from more than anything. You might die tomorrow so just buy stuff you actually want to play, no matter if it has microtransactions or whatever.

You don't need to be rich to spend money on microtransactions. It depends on your lifestyle and what kind of hobbies you have. If you live alone or with a gaming partner and your only hobbies and vacations are games, then instead spending thousands on vacation you spend them on your favorite genre of the game.
Too many people are obsessed with "vote with your wallet" mindset, but they don't realize that people do, they buy stuff that they like and enjoy and don't care what some random GOG user is rambling about on internet forum. It's their earned money and they can spend it however they wish, even if they can regret it later.
I agree that people shouldn't worry about voting with your wallet, and just buy what they enjoy.

1.a. I get that, but there are so many good/great games out there from years back to purchase.....even I find it hard to resist such when sales come around.

2.a. Yeah, which is why i'm all for actual archival efforts(vs piracy just for the sake of being cheap) by some shady groups such as rom sites/etc. They provide a backup/window into the past for this sort of contingency.

Sigh....both of you need to take a step back, see what you're doing wrong, and work to better it a bit.

Tiny, you need to(imo) stop egging certain topics/posters on by posting certain pics/comments on people's ideologies/etc......and FreakShow, you need to relax and not let stuff get to you as much/write more civil replies(if you want to be seen in a better light and have your stuff taken seriously).

Yeah, I know I exhibit my own issues from time to time and should work on getting my own house in order as well, but I thought a bit of friendly advice couldn't hurt. Both of you have some good qualities: You both post some insightful comments from time to time(albeit rudely written sometimes and/or with too many caps[bolding works better to highlight certain words/phrases, imo]), and sometimes you both make me laugh a bit and feel good in general.

1.a. It isn't merely anecdotal. Look on reddit/etc for posts about the movies and see how people who dislike them are treated(There are also other youtube examples which I didn't bother to list). People will literally mock anyone against such blatant propaganda/latest craze media until they break down.


2.a. Do you post such opinions to the big platforms or know those who might? Do you live with others that post to such platforms? If not, then of course you would be less affected by such shunning/ostracizing by those who do so.

(Addition: Just because I didn't post a ton of evidence doesn't mean my argument falls apart or fails to hold water)



Sometimes companies have to proioritize making a profit/staying afloat over customer goodwill. If they choose such, it sucks, but if they do it to remain in business and provide their major tenets to the customer base then it's mildly understandable(if a bit sucky).

Thanks for confirming exactly what I was trying to point out. If you choose to hang out with crowd that gives weight to such issues, of course they will affect you. I choose differently. It's about choice. Your choice, mine... Not WB or disney or EA conspiring to force you to watch or play their latest "hit".

Only if you assume, wrongly, that every game with microtransactions is a huge money maker. For every Clash of Clans, there's more than a dozen failed attempts, just like there are failed attempts in making a single player game as well. The two don't even really compete in the same league, as games as a service or any other game with microtransactions require additional investments in the architecture of making that possible.

We are in a very interesting place now, when old big companies have pushed out their takes on GAAS and microtransactions only to end up failing miserably very publically whereas newer companies have dominated the field. What they've learned is, hopefully, that creating a similar money churner as Clash of Clans is far harder than it looks. It doesn't work if you just try to stuff games like that down the player's throat, there has to be something there in the first place, gameplay wise, not only a brand you've decided to milk.

You call it shaming, I call it activism(if done for an objectively noble cause). And heck, if they(the ones who advocate for worse things) can do it then why shouldn't we use such tools as well?

And yes, believe it or not but some regulation in some arenas can be a good thing. Case in point: Banning lootboxes for real money. They work against people's gambling habits and addictive personalities, and often target children. If something directly harms people in such ways(physically/financially to a detrimental level/etc) then banning/limiting it should be acceptable.

=============================================

Again, avoiding such/deriding such media is not always possible(at least if you are part of the social internet/society). People will try and get you in trouble(by calling you racist/bigot/etc) at your work/with your irl friends & family/etc over what movies you choose not to watch/media you choose not to consume and/or who you like on youtube/facebook/etc.

If you don't have a big prescence on those platforms/any sensitive irl info on them(and such isn't easily obtainable by those against your opinions) then you'd be fine....if not, then......

================================================

Read the reply bit just above this one once more. Sometimes it's not that simple for some people(look up the term social shunning and ostracizing, for starters. They are things, you know)

===============================================

I'm not trying to start a problematic discussion, but I must ask: Are you saying that family/friends are right to say you're racist/sexist/bigoted for not liking/agreeing with the methods used to insert propaganda into the latest cape/marvel/disney film or whatever media it's put into?

(Clarification: I'm not against the messages shown, but the forcing of it in media/the way it's presented so often/in certain forms)

Also big clarification: I called for pressure/activism campaigns to fight any bad trends in gaming/media by citizens against corporations/IP holders. That's far different/better than groups of people ganging up on various individuals because of their beliefs/ideologies online....so no, I wasn't calling for such by what I did call for previously.

=====================================

Both films listed as examples pushed girl power narratives. They may be good films, and while I agree with the message being presented I and others dislike it being presented in mainstream media/to the more gullible/easily led masses.

In both cases people made good points against such blatant propaganda being pushed/that they wren't going to partake and they were mostly all called trolls/sexist/other hateful things because of it.

======================================

He(AVGN) was merely an example to show how shunning online can lead one(especially one such as him with an ample profitable following) to about face in the face of public opinion/how the net can shun/ostracize those who go against the grain of what is currently deemed to be "goodthink" online.

BTW: By weakness it depends on what you deem to be his weakness/my supposed weakness.

Clarification: As I said above in this same reply: I have no problems with such viewpoints(for the most part), just how mass media/entertainment seems to see fit to shove them into everything they can to push the narrative and collectively influence the masses.

===================================

That might've been a better idea, rather than them going with "girl power ghostbusters better than male ghostbusters" just because that's the in-thing nowadays.

Sidenote: They want to make a continuation of the original 2 films with a teen/etc cast, and some of the previous film's cast are whining that it's not fair to reboot the series/continue it some other way after they did...make of that what you will.

==================================

You two are very lucky, then.



1. As others said, we also have value in how we choose to promote some media/products(especially those with clout online). There's also the value of your personal data to some companies as well.

Also, many mega companies rule things because of lax legal loopholes/gov't kickbacks, and those who mindlessly follow whatever trend said companies dish out.

Also: I don't think the OP meant to single you out/make fun of those who choose to excercise said voting power with the usage of said phrase in their thread OP/title(I could be wrong, but I mostly doubt it)...they were just trying to point out that the whole thing wasn't so simple with mindless consumers being part of the equation.

===============================================================

2. That's part of a free market society that we have to accept(if one wants to live in a truly free market), sadly. If you/others can choose to be smart with your spending then others can also choose to be "dumb"(or just different) with theirs.
1. A single person's purchases sadly mean squat to big corporations(Unless said spender is a bigshot online/irl and can make a fuss about stuff they dislike).

2. If every corporation is bad to some degree, then choosing samsung over iphone just means you're choosing the lesser of two evils(I'm not saying this isn't a good idea...just saying that usually no company's hands are totally clean).

3. No one is coming after your saying(heck, it's not even your saying....as in you didn't create it....so why take offense if someone is against it or proves ot slightly wrong/irrelevant?) because of you, personally.

That's "illegal"(although most eulas are in a grey area of enforcability in many countries), but then so is archival" backups of PCs games/music CDs/etc. People still make those with not even 2 f*cks given.