Blizzard announced yesterday that Diablo 3 will have an auction house for players to buy and sell their hard earned treasures, which surprised no one. Blizzard also announced that players would be able to post auctions both for gold, the in-game currency, and also for real money. That surprised many people.
This announcement represents two major policy shifts for Blizzard. First, after years of fighting the underground item/character markets for Diablo 2 they are instead embracing and facilitating them. Second, they have crossed the line between only selling cosmetic effects and selling power/achievement, even if only slightly.
It's the second of these two policy shifts that has my attention. Selling power isn't universally a mistake (it works very well for the supercapitalist EVE Online) but is so frequently one as to warrant, at the very least, extreme care. Without absolutely perfect execution it can and will destroy a game's longevity and community.
This isn't unique to selling power, any game mechanic which trivializes accomplishment will undermine a game's community. There need to be goals, accomplishments and prestige in games for their communities to thrive. Most implementations of selling power, including what we know of Diablo 3, undermine these fundamental aspects of the game.
Diablo 3 is still something I'm very excited about, and it's extremely likely that I will be staying up to play it the night it launches. However, I worry that the community of the game will suffer for decisions like this one.
Showing posts with label money. Show all posts
Showing posts with label money. Show all posts
20110802
20110526
Today's Fortune: Wealth
Today's fortune cookie reads: "Wealth is a state of mind."
There is actually some depth to this, but at the same time I can't get out of my head the image of a drunken hobo screaming "I'm king of the world!" while being dragged off the streets by police officers for disturbing the peace.
There is actually some depth to this, but at the same time I can't get out of my head the image of a drunken hobo screaming "I'm king of the world!" while being dragged off the streets by police officers for disturbing the peace.
20091112
20090318
Wakanai
There are several elements of this recession that bother me. This discomfort and irritation stems from the lack of understanding I have regarding them. They don't make sense to me, and I don't see why they should make sense to anyone.
The first is AIG. They'll be paying out $165 million in bonuses to 370 people who are largely responsible for tanking the company. Now that seems unthinkable, idiotic, and stupid but hold your judgement. They're only paying the bonuses because they are contractually obligated to. Wait, what?
For the common worker, a bonus is something they get when they work hard and deliver for the company above and beyond the call of duty. It's an optional reward, usually tied to a specific, tight deadline or milestone. The average office worker is never guaranteed a bonus, they have to sweat for them. That's the whole point of bonuses, excel and you can reap the benefits. It's a pat on the back for a job well done, a reminder that companies value those who put in their best effort.
What in the name of sanity was AIG's HR department thinking when they made "bonuses" a contractual obligation. How can you even call it a bonus? I don't understand how that works or makes sense. It defeats the entire purpose and concept to award people who seriously fubar'd the company and economy such lofty sums.
The second confusion is short selling. I want to make sure I have this concept down. You borrow someone else's stock, which you don't actually own, and sell it. Then you rebuy it at a later date and give it back to them. You're betting the stock will drop, so that when you rebuy the price will be less than it was when you sold.
First issue: Whose stock are you borrowing? I want to know, because the idea that some creep can use my stock for such things is terribly upsetting. I can't walk into someone's house and sell their antiques, promising to buy them back later. It doesn't work that way.
Second issue: Doesn't this create a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts? Say Mr. Financial Guru suggests short selling stock A. A whole crapton of people follow his suggestion and low and behold the stock drops. Tadah, short sellers make money, while whoever was actually holding on to the stock loses.
The financial markets are seriously whack. Seriously.
The first is AIG. They'll be paying out $165 million in bonuses to 370 people who are largely responsible for tanking the company. Now that seems unthinkable, idiotic, and stupid but hold your judgement. They're only paying the bonuses because they are contractually obligated to. Wait, what?
For the common worker, a bonus is something they get when they work hard and deliver for the company above and beyond the call of duty. It's an optional reward, usually tied to a specific, tight deadline or milestone. The average office worker is never guaranteed a bonus, they have to sweat for them. That's the whole point of bonuses, excel and you can reap the benefits. It's a pat on the back for a job well done, a reminder that companies value those who put in their best effort.
What in the name of sanity was AIG's HR department thinking when they made "bonuses" a contractual obligation. How can you even call it a bonus? I don't understand how that works or makes sense. It defeats the entire purpose and concept to award people who seriously fubar'd the company and economy such lofty sums.
The second confusion is short selling. I want to make sure I have this concept down. You borrow someone else's stock, which you don't actually own, and sell it. Then you rebuy it at a later date and give it back to them. You're betting the stock will drop, so that when you rebuy the price will be less than it was when you sold.
First issue: Whose stock are you borrowing? I want to know, because the idea that some creep can use my stock for such things is terribly upsetting. I can't walk into someone's house and sell their antiques, promising to buy them back later. It doesn't work that way.
Second issue: Doesn't this create a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts? Say Mr. Financial Guru suggests short selling stock A. A whole crapton of people follow his suggestion and low and behold the stock drops. Tadah, short sellers make money, while whoever was actually holding on to the stock loses.
The financial markets are seriously whack. Seriously.
20081020
Rant: Dollar Voting
Don't waste your vote by not voting.
You've heard it from the demographically obsessed media, X group is more important than Y group because they actually get up and vote. Politicians target people who vote or they lose. It's as simple as that. Not voting sends a clear message to them, "I'm not worth your time".
This is a clear and obvious aspect of politics from the local to the national level, those who participate get things done.
Corporate America is exactly the same. People often talk about "voting" with their money, but this is usually in the context of choosing between a purchase and saving rather than picking between a number of purchasing options. Companies don't track failed sales, they track the people who buy their products. They don't give any heed to people who just save their money, looking instead at who is going to their competitors and why.
Keep this in mind if you're avoiding a purchase or spurning a choice between two political candidates you hate. If you want to send a message, staying home and keeping your vote to yourself only leaves the decisions up to someone else. Even if you throw it at Joe's Custom Built Rickety Fridges/Political Candidates your vote is better used than if it isn't used at all.
You've heard it from the demographically obsessed media, X group is more important than Y group because they actually get up and vote. Politicians target people who vote or they lose. It's as simple as that. Not voting sends a clear message to them, "I'm not worth your time".
This is a clear and obvious aspect of politics from the local to the national level, those who participate get things done.
Corporate America is exactly the same. People often talk about "voting" with their money, but this is usually in the context of choosing between a purchase and saving rather than picking between a number of purchasing options. Companies don't track failed sales, they track the people who buy their products. They don't give any heed to people who just save their money, looking instead at who is going to their competitors and why.
Keep this in mind if you're avoiding a purchase or spurning a choice between two political candidates you hate. If you want to send a message, staying home and keeping your vote to yourself only leaves the decisions up to someone else. Even if you throw it at Joe's Custom Built Rickety Fridges/Political Candidates your vote is better used than if it isn't used at all.
20071005
MWAK: Medium?
Intelligence is one of those games with a default "Impossible" difficulty. There really isn't another explanation for what I am about to tell you. This is the first ever official Monkey with a Keyboard (MWAK) post, and it will be obvious why before long.
In case you haven't noticed, I've been on a James Randi binge lately. Maybe it's because I'm an inherently trusting person and I very much dislike the notion of people preying on trusting people. Maybe it's because I'm a religious skeptic of sorts. Mostly it's because he's awesome.
While I was perusing some clips from a TV show he did back in 1991, I followed a trail of Youtube videos until I came to one titled "James Randi's Scam". I thought it was about his Project Alpha experiment. It turned out to be the confusing ramblings of a self-proclaimed medium about how Randi is a hack.
I haven't linked the video here, because it honestly doesn't deserve any attention.
However, here is a comment made by a supporter of the video's creator, going by the nickname skepticslayer1234.
Now, being the skeptic I am, I needed to investigate this. I happen to know that the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) keeps an online record of all applicants. If this Bill Perron applied, as he claims, he and his application letter would surely be listed on the website.
This is the text of his application, copied here because it needs to be disseminated all over the internet as a casebook example of MWAK.
And I quote the unmodified, untranslated work of Bill Perron (sources following):
Sources arehere and here.
I'd like to highlight a few things.
Firstly, this application was hand written. I would have said, "this guy is an example of everything that is wrong with the internet", except he actually took a pen and wrote that out, in all caps. I don't know what OBSERABLY, FRAUDENTLY and TRINES are, but they must be the angels of his swift justice against Randi.
Secondly, this man has a computer and printer. It's part of his whole computer horoscope medium profession. Was it impossible for him to type up the letter instead? Would that have jived with the vibes of his electronic equipment or something? Was he afraid that somehow, Randi would be able to infer something about his computer from the paper and sabotage his ability to do horoscopes? It just baffles me that someone claiming to be able to use a computer for something as complex and important as prognosticating intricate information about a person and their future is incapable of typing up a letter and printing it out.
Thirdly, I believe this guy was yelling this out as he wrote it, one word at a time. Maybe he didn't, but it's a hilarious picture to imagine a grown man furiously scribbling in all caps, yelling out each word with long pauses. Pure speculation, humorous image.
Fourthly, I'm wondering if this is the same way he turns in job applications. I'm not sure McDonalds would accept anything written in that style.
Fifthly, I'd be interested in statistics of his accuracy versus the length of marriage + courtship for couples. I wonder if the general assertions of a horoscope are more likely to ring bells with newlyweds over marriages going on 25 years.
Sixthly, as an officer in my guild I have to sort through people submitting applications. Admittedly our process is simply "Talk to us, if you're sane you're probably in", but a surprising number of people fail miserably. Specifically, their conduct and style of writing are expressly indicative of the maturity of a 6 year old child. Given that we're just a guild in a video game, that seems relatively understandable; chances are half of them were 6 years old. However, when someone's applying for a million dollar prize and drops sentences such as, "THEN I WILL OBSERVE HOW MR. RANDI FRAUDENTLY GETS OUT OF PAYING ME THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT I WIN" I can't help but shake my head.
Lastly, the old adage "a person is smart, people are stupid" needs updating. This man defies it, too bad there's no million dollar prize for that.
Thus endeth the first MWAK. I pray there aren't more to come.
In case you haven't noticed, I've been on a James Randi binge lately. Maybe it's because I'm an inherently trusting person and I very much dislike the notion of people preying on trusting people. Maybe it's because I'm a religious skeptic of sorts. Mostly it's because he's awesome.
While I was perusing some clips from a TV show he did back in 1991, I followed a trail of Youtube videos until I came to one titled "James Randi's Scam". I thought it was about his Project Alpha experiment. It turned out to be the confusing ramblings of a self-proclaimed medium about how Randi is a hack.
I haven't linked the video here, because it honestly doesn't deserve any attention.
However, here is a comment made by a supporter of the video's creator, going by the nickname skepticslayer1234.
I applied to be tested for the million and Randi lied to get out of testing me. He rejected my application saying I wanted no photos taken. Truth is I insisted the whole proceedure be video taped. I have offered Randi ten grand to meet me in public with his proof I wanted no photos but he runs from my "Honesty Challenge". Randi is a cowardly liar. Bill Perron
Now, being the skeptic I am, I needed to investigate this. I happen to know that the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) keeps an online record of all applicants. If this Bill Perron applied, as he claims, he and his application letter would surely be listed on the website.
This is the text of his application, copied here because it needs to be disseminated all over the internet as a casebook example of MWAK.
And I quote the unmodified, untranslated work of Bill Perron (sources following):
USING MY DELL LAPTOP COMPUTER AND LEXMARK PRINTER I WILL PRODUCE HOROSCOPES CONTAINING THE PLANETS, THEIR RELATIVE POSITIONING AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THESE POSITIONS AND WHAT THEY INDICATE ABOUT A PERSON THEIR PERSONALITY, CHARACTERISTICS, AND NATURE. I WILL DO THIS WITH A DEGREE OF ACCURACY THAT WILL BE OBSERABLY BEYOND MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY.
THEN I WILL OBSERVE HOW MR. RANDI FRAUDENTLY GETS OUT OF PAYING ME THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT I WIN.
MY PREFERED WAY TEST MY HOROSCOPES IS TO GO TO A PUBLIC PLACE PERHAPS A SHOPPING MALL AND ASK TOTAL STRANGERS WHO ARE MARRIED TO ALLOW ME TO DO A HOROSCOPE ON THE HUSBAND AND THEN TO HAVE THE WIFE READ THE 8 PAGES OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE HOROSCOPE AND TELL US HOW ACCURATE IT IS. I HAVE FOUND WIVES TO KNOW THEIR HUSBANDS VERY WELL AND THEY ARE NOT SHY ABOUT BEING VERY CRITICAL OF THEIR SPOUSES IF I GET AT LEAST A 60% OR BETTER ON THE HOROSCOPES THAT IS ABOVE CHANCE SO I WIN. I BELIEVE 5 HOROSCOPES ARE ENOUGH TO TEST THE ACCURACY BUT IF JREF WANT ME TO DO MORE I WILL BE GLAD TO BUT THERE HAS TO BE AN EVENTUAL LIMIT. SINCE JREF BELIEVES ASTROLOGY IS BUNK THEN ONLY ONE ACCURATE HOROSCOPE SHOULD BE SUFFICENT BUT REPEATABILITY IS REQUIRED SO I SUGGESTED 5 ACCURATE HOROSCOPES I WILL BE USING 12 ZODIAC SIGNS ALL THE PLANETS ALL 12 HOUSES PLUS ALL THE ASPECTS TRINES, SQUARES, ETC. THIS JUST FURTHER DOCUMENTS & SUPPORTS THAT MY ACCURACY IS WAY BEYOND CHANCE.
Sources arehere and here.
I'd like to highlight a few things.
Firstly, this application was hand written. I would have said, "this guy is an example of everything that is wrong with the internet", except he actually took a pen and wrote that out, in all caps. I don't know what OBSERABLY, FRAUDENTLY and TRINES are, but they must be the angels of his swift justice against Randi.
Secondly, this man has a computer and printer. It's part of his whole computer horoscope medium profession. Was it impossible for him to type up the letter instead? Would that have jived with the vibes of his electronic equipment or something? Was he afraid that somehow, Randi would be able to infer something about his computer from the paper and sabotage his ability to do horoscopes? It just baffles me that someone claiming to be able to use a computer for something as complex and important as prognosticating intricate information about a person and their future is incapable of typing up a letter and printing it out.
Thirdly, I believe this guy was yelling this out as he wrote it, one word at a time. Maybe he didn't, but it's a hilarious picture to imagine a grown man furiously scribbling in all caps, yelling out each word with long pauses. Pure speculation, humorous image.
Fourthly, I'm wondering if this is the same way he turns in job applications. I'm not sure McDonalds would accept anything written in that style.
Fifthly, I'd be interested in statistics of his accuracy versus the length of marriage + courtship for couples. I wonder if the general assertions of a horoscope are more likely to ring bells with newlyweds over marriages going on 25 years.
Sixthly, as an officer in my guild I have to sort through people submitting applications. Admittedly our process is simply "Talk to us, if you're sane you're probably in", but a surprising number of people fail miserably. Specifically, their conduct and style of writing are expressly indicative of the maturity of a 6 year old child. Given that we're just a guild in a video game, that seems relatively understandable; chances are half of them were 6 years old. However, when someone's applying for a million dollar prize and drops sentences such as, "THEN I WILL OBSERVE HOW MR. RANDI FRAUDENTLY GETS OUT OF PAYING ME THE MILLION DOLLARS THAT I WIN" I can't help but shake my head.
Lastly, the old adage "a person is smart, people are stupid" needs updating. This man defies it, too bad there's no million dollar prize for that.
Thus endeth the first MWAK. I pray there aren't more to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
