Why protest when you're only hurting yourself?
- Thread starter Zakalwe
- Start date
Liberty4all
Banned
I put my money where my mouth is.
Boycotts are not just to get what we want, but also to live by the rules and expectations we hold true. For an example if I say I am going to boycott EA, it doesn't just mean I am trying to get EA to do what I want, but also that I don't want my money to support their horrible practices even if there was a completely 0% chance of change etc.
EDIT: 1st post said it better.
EDIT: 1st post said it better.
NinjaCatfish
Member
If you're 'boycotting' a game, you probably wouldn't have bought it in the first place.
A boycott is just a way to make the decision to not buy a game sound like something way more important than it is.
A boycott is just a way to make the decision to not buy a game sound like something way more important than it is.
Saintguine
Member
Ditto.
Plus boycott has worked. DmC sold less than half of DMC4 because a large portion of the DMC fanbase did not like the game, how the studio who made the game behaved and the publisher's attitude towards DMC.
EvilKatarn
Member
Sure. Because no one was going to buy Ground Zeroes anyway, right?
Money where mouth is here also. No micro-transaction ever purchased, ignoring games that require Uplay on Steam etc.
It doesn't feel like boycotting to me though. Because when through whatever reason I believe, say games I want to buy on Steam (meaning I consciously made a decision to not buy it on Uplay) for some reason has to go through Uplay, I don't want it anymore, simple as.
It's a shitty way of doing things, I don't like it. That's the end. I don't go around shitting on Uplay though but I will never use it nor will I purchase games on Steam that use it.
To me it doesn't feel like I am hurting myself but it's a bit of a bad example in that I got other formats I can buy these games on most of the time but I don't sit at a game page of a Steam game that require Uplay sweating and resisting the urge or anything. "oh requires uplay? bye" is the end of it.
It doesn't feel like boycotting to me though. Because when through whatever reason I believe, say games I want to buy on Steam (meaning I consciously made a decision to not buy it on Uplay) for some reason has to go through Uplay, I don't want it anymore, simple as.
It's a shitty way of doing things, I don't like it. That's the end. I don't go around shitting on Uplay though but I will never use it nor will I purchase games on Steam that use it.
To me it doesn't feel like I am hurting myself but it's a bit of a bad example in that I got other formats I can buy these games on most of the time but I don't sit at a game page of a Steam game that require Uplay sweating and resisting the urge or anything. "oh requires uplay? bye" is the end of it.
Well, it certainly worked well with the whole Xbone fiasco. The predicament they were setting was dangerous, and I'm glad that we as consumers managed to throw them off that idea by protesting.
At the end of the day, companies are going to change and follow the market. If they don't adapt, they're going to fail, so I think it's a vital to speak your mind when you dont' feel like something is right.
At the end of the day, companies are going to change and follow the market. If they don't adapt, they're going to fail, so I think it's a vital to speak your mind when you dont' feel like something is right.
Ein Bear
Member
I always think words like 'boycott' sound much too grand for what's actually happening.
Games are products, and I decide if what they are offering me is worth the asking price. It's fair enough to make rational purchasing decisions, but when you've got people in the Ground Zeroes thread saying stuff like 'Anyone who buys this game is contributing to the downfall of the industry!!!' I can't help but roll my eyes.
Games are products, and I decide if what they are offering me is worth the asking price. It's fair enough to make rational purchasing decisions, but when you've got people in the Ground Zeroes thread saying stuff like 'Anyone who buys this game is contributing to the downfall of the industry!!!' I can't help but roll my eyes.
Sir Blaming
Member
money is the reason why boycott don't work as first post have said. Mass Effect 3 was something that only could be found when people had finished it, and at that time, they had the money already. Which brings the problem of preorders.
ebullientprism
Member
LOL Nope. Just for an example, Diablo 3 and Simcity disagree. Would have Day 1'd both of them.
As far as the OP is concerned, its simply because its not really "hurting yourself". There are a ton of other games available. So even if I have to bypass a game I like and wanted there are 10 others to take its place.
NinjaCatfish
Member
Yes, but you made the decision not to purchase Diablo 3 and SimCity. That's all.
What makes your decision not buy buy a thing based on a reason a 'boycott' and not just a value based decision you made?
ScreenSplitter
Member
I mean, this sort of attitude is why boycotts never work.
CecilRousso
Member
The public has won many DRM battles so change is very much possible. Games for WIndows Live died because the public didn't want it.
And since there are more good games out there then you have time to play, you can afford to boycott a bunch of them, even if the hope of it to have an effect is slim or none.
And it's silly to pay for things you don't want to support.
And since there are more good games out there then you have time to play, you can afford to boycott a bunch of them, even if the hope of it to have an effect is slim or none.
And it's silly to pay for things you don't want to support.
Fox_Mulder
Rockefellers. Skull and Bones. Microsoft. Al Qaeda. A Cabal of Bankers. The melting point of steel. What do these things have in common? Wake up sheeple, the landfill wasn't even REAL!
I spend MY money where I want. Period.
If I don't want support companies like EA but I prefer spend my money in other videogames is only a mine decision. The world is plenty of games I want to play.
This thread is quite absurd.
If I don't want support companies like EA but I prefer spend my money in other videogames is only a mine decision. The world is plenty of games I want to play.
This thread is quite absurd.
Holy Order Sol
Member
My purchases are based on whether I want the content and can afford it or not, so I still think I'm consistent with myself since I don't make those kinds of broad statements in the first place. I don't feel responsible for any kind of trend either.
"There are other games" doesn't cut it for me. If at any given time I want to play a particular game, it's because I want to play that one game, not because I want to play a game and this happens to be available.
Also this and the "part of the problem" talk. I've always been into this hobby for my personal enjoyment, not to be made a part of something allegedly greater and have people try and to guilt trip me into things.
"There are other games" doesn't cut it for me. If at any given time I want to play a particular game, it's because I want to play that one game, not because I want to play a game and this happens to be available.
Also this and the "part of the problem" talk. I've always been into this hobby for my personal enjoyment, not to be made a part of something allegedly greater and have people try and to guilt trip me into things.
michaelius
Banned
I vote with my wallet.
I've got ME1 PC on day 1, ME2 PC on day one and ME3 from PSN+.
I've got ME1 PC on day 1, ME2 PC on day one and ME3 from PSN+.
Starwolf_UK
Member
My current protest, no NNID on my 3DS is a no pain no gain type of hurting myself I guess. The pain I get from not being able to use the features it adds (most of which were standard before its introduction) is cancelled by the pain I can relieve by being able to change countries and so have the option to offset some of the eShop pricing problems by playing the currency markets (oh but I put the publishers in pain by them getting less but my money can be spread to more of them).
I know Nintendo won't change but I don't have to feel bad about doing something I disagree with (region locking and progress going backwards).
I know Nintendo won't change but I don't have to feel bad about doing something I disagree with (region locking and progress going backwards).
For me, with one exception detailed below, I don't boycott. I wait. Companies need that day 1 cash, and waiting even a month hits them.
I do boycott exploitative companies like zynga that prey on the vulnerable. I really want to boycott valve as well, but I'm not that committed.
Whenever I decide not to buy a game for whatever reason, I never really expect that to garner any kind of response from the publisher/developer. Yes, companies are likely to only respond to large scale feedback, but that doesn't mean you should just shrug your shoulders and open your wallet. We can all really only act as individuals and sometimes it'll have an effect, most of the time it won't - but it's what makes a market work, people deciding what to do with their money on an individual basis. Not everything needs to be a campaign, just a decision about how to spend your hard-earned and what message that could potentially send.
Each individual has a set of standards or principles, a tolerance for platform quirks, a level of income, and a list of other things they could be doing with their money that gets weighed against the desire to play any particular game. If it's found wanting, it doesn't get bought. So if someone feels strongly enough about Origins that, combined with the other factors listed above, it outweighs their desire to play a particular game released on that platform, of course they'll boycott it. And they're not 'hurting' themselves - they have weighed the experience of playing the game against all these other factors and decided that their preference is not to play it.
Each individual has a set of standards or principles, a tolerance for platform quirks, a level of income, and a list of other things they could be doing with their money that gets weighed against the desire to play any particular game. If it's found wanting, it doesn't get bought. So if someone feels strongly enough about Origins that, combined with the other factors listed above, it outweighs their desire to play a particular game released on that platform, of course they'll boycott it. And they're not 'hurting' themselves - they have weighed the experience of playing the game against all these other factors and decided that their preference is not to play it.
This is true, but it's not the attitude of the core fanbase, it's the attitude of the nonchalant fanbase. The casual majority. These people almost always don't care enough to get behind any kind of movement.
There are exceptions where boycotts and protests do work, but changes to game franchises that rely on their niche core is not the same thing as EA insisting on Orign as EA have overwhelming commercial support from the casual user base and aren't going to budge.
Which is fine, and I can respect that. I used to do the same thing, but these days there are elements of the industry I will accept for now because they're not going anywhere, and I'll shift my focus to giving feedback instead of boycott, and by supporting other elements within the industry that could potentially pave the way for future changes.
A straight up boycott of something like Origin is not going to change a thing, and will only limit your own access. It feels like brushing under the carpet instead of actually trying to instigate change in the face of reality.
I can't play everything that looks interesting to me, as such, even if no one ever did anything disagreeable, I'd always be missing out on something I want to play because my time is limited. If a publisher or developer does something I disagree with, I'll just play something else. I don't see how that hurts me.
Also, if you really dislike something, you shouldn't encourage it. Saying you won't make a difference is a lame defeatist cop out for being weak willed.
Also, if you really dislike something, you shouldn't encourage it. Saying you won't make a difference is a lame defeatist cop out for being weak willed.
Liberty4all
Banned
OP you are thinking about it too hard. Buy things you like. Ignore things you don't.
The only reality that matters is the one you buy into.
edit: and the wallet does make a difference ... Look at the 180 on the xbone for evidence of that.
Stone Ocean
Member
Because most of the time supporting shitty practices is hurting myself on the long run.
It's not about morals or principles, it's about not giving money to further fund things that go against my interests, it's a business relationship and not some kind of pride war.
It's not about morals or principles, it's about not giving money to further fund things that go against my interests, it's a business relationship and not some kind of pride war.
Imperfected
Member
So, your theory is that people should only boycott things they weren't going to buy to begin with?
Yes, boycotts of Origin do change things. The lower sales numbers for games released on Origin as opposed to Steam discourages companies from doing Origin-only releases. You think EA wouldn't try to sweet-talk companies into releasing their games as "Origin Exclusives" if they had enough market share to do so?
Yes, boycotts of Steam do change things. The fact that people exist who will not play Steam games means that a market exists for competing, no-DRM services. There would be virtually no reason for these services to exist if there weren't Steam boycotters.
Yes, boycotts of SimCity do change things. EA failed to hit their sales targets for the game - especially the expansion and add-on content - and are adding offline play as a direct result of that. The fact that so many people refused to play the game because of its onerous online component is actually causing that component to be removed. How much more direct cause and effect could you ask for with a protest action?
Yes, boycotts of Origin do change things. The lower sales numbers for games released on Origin as opposed to Steam discourages companies from doing Origin-only releases. You think EA wouldn't try to sweet-talk companies into releasing their games as "Origin Exclusives" if they had enough market share to do so?
Yes, boycotts of Steam do change things. The fact that people exist who will not play Steam games means that a market exists for competing, no-DRM services. There would be virtually no reason for these services to exist if there weren't Steam boycotters.
Yes, boycotts of SimCity do change things. EA failed to hit their sales targets for the game - especially the expansion and add-on content - and are adding offline play as a direct result of that. The fact that so many people refused to play the game because of its onerous online component is actually causing that component to be removed. How much more direct cause and effect could you ask for with a protest action?
Waluigilicious
Member
Probably a rare case but I'm boycotting Dr. Luigi because of its pricing. I really want it and want to play it, but it should be cheaper.
Will it have an effect? Probably not. But if someone like me (who buys most mario games) passes on this game, then I like to imagine that a lot of people will.
Will it have an effect? Probably not. But if someone like me (who buys most mario games) passes on this game, then I like to imagine that a lot of people will.
But the point of a boycott is to protect yourself (or rather in the case of video games: protect your money)
I am not buying Ground Zero not to make some statement that will create waves of change in the video game industry. I am not buying it because i value the time i spend both in my free time, and my workplace, to waste X dollars on a game that will only give me Y amounts of entertainment.
Only the vocal minority of people who boycott something tend to make a big fuss about it. The rest of us just here with our arms folded and simply say "oh..that is what you are offering?..well...nah" and that is it.
If Ground Zero sells 20 million copies, then good for them. Or if Konami goes bankrupt and the game tanks, then i dont give one way or the other.
When I look at the size of my backlog, it's clear that I'm not missing out on anything by skipping games that have shitty business practices attached to them. I'm certainly not "hurting myself" by not buying Ground Zeros, or SimCity, or even an Xbox One if I don't feel comfortable with my money supporting things I don't agree with. There are always other games to play and other systems to play them on.
I would be hurting myself if I allowed my money to support companies that I believe to be anti-consumer. Boycott is far too strong of a word though, I would just say that I am a conscientious spender. It's impossible to prevent your money from supporting bad things 100% of the time, but I've never felt like I am losing anything by trying.
Also, I have to respond to this:
The feedback a company listens to the most is how much money is coming in. If you think they give a shit about anything else, you don't understand how capitalism works. When you see large companies making changes (such as the Xbox 180s), it's only because they are scared the money will stop rolling in.
I would be hurting myself if I allowed my money to support companies that I believe to be anti-consumer. Boycott is far too strong of a word though, I would just say that I am a conscientious spender. It's impossible to prevent your money from supporting bad things 100% of the time, but I've never felt like I am losing anything by trying.
Also, I have to respond to this:
The feedback a company listens to the most is how much money is coming in. If you think they give a shit about anything else, you don't understand how capitalism works. When you see large companies making changes (such as the Xbox 180s), it's only because they are scared the money will stop rolling in.
Glass Rebel
Member
Then you're not boycotting it but simply deciding not to buy it.
I haven't bought any always on game and hopefully never will (not counting any multiplayer only games of course).
If that means I won't play few games? I can live with it. There are enough good games for me to play anyway.
It's game companies who need my money more than I need their game.
If that means I won't play few games? I can live with it. There are enough good games for me to play anyway.
It's game companies who need my money more than I need their game.
Earthpainting
Member
Eh. I value my principles more than my need to play certain games. This is not necessarily directed at the examples in the OP, but if I really disagree with a practice or a company, I'm just done with them. When I learned about gun licensing, I've made a point of not purchasing titles anymore with real gun brands in them. I won't bother people who don't mind this stuff. To each their own. I just don't want my money going to those things, directly or indirectly.
Considering there's no lack in games to play, I don't particularly care all that much if I have to skip a couple.
Considering there's no lack in games to play, I don't particularly care all that much if I have to skip a couple.
Hoho for breakfast
Member
To answer why I would personally boycott for myself is simply because of principles and convictions. If I feel you don't deserve my money for some reason then you won't get it. It would be silly to do anything differently.
Now as to why I would strongly voice those opinions, nothing would ever change in our favor if not for things like boycotts. Does a straight boycott ever really work? Rarely, but it has an effect regardless.
When I post my opinions regarding things like this I am voicing my anger or frustration or whatever which makes me feel better having said it, and I also hope that it has an influence on others as well.
Imagine if everyone was ok with everything publishers or corporations decided to do. Nobody ever voiced a dissenting opinion. Where would that put us right now? We'd be in a terrible position surely.
Now imagine if everyone demanded change immediately. Imagine if the vast, vast majority were not ok with something and demanded change now. I believe in the vast majority of cases the vast majority would rule.
Imagine everyone standing together for a common cause right now and saying ENOUGH, or NO MORE, or NEVER AGAIN. This imo would almost immediately bring about the desired change.
So in reality there is a mix of opinions one way or another and it helps keep things balanced and in check for the most part. This makes it OK (but not ideal) for both "us" and at the same time for "them".
Now as to why I would strongly voice those opinions, nothing would ever change in our favor if not for things like boycotts. Does a straight boycott ever really work? Rarely, but it has an effect regardless.
When I post my opinions regarding things like this I am voicing my anger or frustration or whatever which makes me feel better having said it, and I also hope that it has an influence on others as well.
Imagine if everyone was ok with everything publishers or corporations decided to do. Nobody ever voiced a dissenting opinion. Where would that put us right now? We'd be in a terrible position surely.
Now imagine if everyone demanded change immediately. Imagine if the vast, vast majority were not ok with something and demanded change now. I believe in the vast majority of cases the vast majority would rule.
Imagine everyone standing together for a common cause right now and saying ENOUGH, or NO MORE, or NEVER AGAIN. This imo would almost immediately bring about the desired change.
So in reality there is a mix of opinions one way or another and it helps keep things balanced and in check for the most part. This makes it OK (but not ideal) for both "us" and at the same time for "them".
whatsinaname
Member
You seem to beg the question by assuming that all of us do it for a "greater cause". In many cases, it is as straightforward as "The game is not worth the $askingprice + the pain of origin/steam/drm/micro-stransactions". If there are enough cases of that for a company to change its policy, good for us. If not, the product's real price is deemed too expensive and we move on.
RuneFactoryFanboy
Member
Life is too short and my time has become too precious to boycott the things I enjoy over principle.
To play the games I am interested in I will put up with a whole lot. Buying Might Switch Force off the eShop, despite the lack of account system. Buying a Wii U to play Monster Hunter, despite me despising just about everything about the console. Re-buying the iPad version of FFT, despite that I already owned the iPhone version. There are many more examples but each time the amount of enjoyment I got out of the game in question far outweighed the negatives. It seems ridiculous to me to deny myself all these fun times over some principle that wont ever be conveyed back to the publisher anyways.
To play the games I am interested in I will put up with a whole lot. Buying Might Switch Force off the eShop, despite the lack of account system. Buying a Wii U to play Monster Hunter, despite me despising just about everything about the console. Re-buying the iPad version of FFT, despite that I already owned the iPhone version. There are many more examples but each time the amount of enjoyment I got out of the game in question far outweighed the negatives. It seems ridiculous to me to deny myself all these fun times over some principle that wont ever be conveyed back to the publisher anyways.
FunkyPajamas
Member
Because there's such a thing as principles. If you only boycotted or protested things when it didn't mean you had to make sacrifices, then you're not really fighting for what you believe in, no? Only for what suits you, when it's "easy".
There are far, far better ways of protesting or (in this specific consumer-oriented case) not supporting a company or a product: buy second hand. Buy only when really cheap or discounted. Only rent, not own. Etc.
travisbickle
Member
I don;t understand people who complain endlessly before release then buy the game/service/console anyway! How difficult is it not to buy something you disagree with?
TouchMyBox
Member
Every time something bullshit happens people say "vote with your wallets!" and then everybody proceeds to give their money away regardless.
Sure, Mass Effect was one of my favorite games of last-gen and I never played 3, and I probably would have bought it if it weren't Origin exclusive, but the first hour of the game I played was also terribad not to mention watching the ending on YouTube and seeing what a train wreck it was. So far by not using Origin I don't feel like I've missed out on any worthwhile games so I don't feel that I have "hurt myself", so voting with my wallet has been pretty damn easy.
If Dice somehow manages to not fuck up Mirror's Edge 2 on the other hand... That's gonna be a tough position.
Sure, Mass Effect was one of my favorite games of last-gen and I never played 3, and I probably would have bought it if it weren't Origin exclusive, but the first hour of the game I played was also terribad not to mention watching the ending on YouTube and seeing what a train wreck it was. So far by not using Origin I don't feel like I've missed out on any worthwhile games so I don't feel that I have "hurt myself", so voting with my wallet has been pretty damn easy.
If Dice somehow manages to not fuck up Mirror's Edge 2 on the other hand... That's gonna be a tough position.
disastermouse
Banned
This is only true if your only values are market values or values related to personal gratification. As you may have noticed, a lot of people don't respond to a market merely in those terms.
Phatosaurus
Member
I don't feel like I missed out or "hurt myself" by not buying DmC.
I also don't feel I'm missing out by not installing Origin on my PC. I don't consider it a boycott, I just don't want to use the service.
I still play some EA games on consoles but after the Battlefield 4 fiasco, I'll be giving all their future releases a wide berth.
I also don't feel I'm missing out by not installing Origin on my PC. I don't consider it a boycott, I just don't want to use the service.
I still play some EA games on consoles but after the Battlefield 4 fiasco, I'll be giving all their future releases a wide berth.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I get what your saying OP but, just like everyone else is saying, it's about the principle.
We as consumers don't get anything back for being loyal and sticking through the worst. Instead, some companies use that as motivation to throw us less for more because some of us won't question anything they do.
Even if boycotting a game was real, it would never happen because there's always going to be someone who justify their purchase because they aren't about the politics. I think what's more frustrating however, is the message is never consistent. We want to rant about the things that's wrong beforehand, but then buy those things once they debut, then want to complain about them after when they aren't what we wanted but then instead of holding on to that experience for the next edition, instead, buy the new edition, rinse and repeat with something else to complain about.
We as consumers don't get anything back for being loyal and sticking through the worst. Instead, some companies use that as motivation to throw us less for more because some of us won't question anything they do.
Even if boycotting a game was real, it would never happen because there's always going to be someone who justify their purchase because they aren't about the politics. I think what's more frustrating however, is the message is never consistent. We want to rant about the things that's wrong beforehand, but then buy those things once they debut, then want to complain about them after when they aren't what we wanted but then instead of holding on to that experience for the next edition, instead, buy the new edition, rinse and repeat with something else to complain about.