So we always have to buy more premium currency then we need to buy premium stuff. Nice predatory tactic Fatshark. Tought you are better than this. Or maybe it's Tencent? Plus timer for FOMO

[OrsonMaxwell]

Alright, I think I have found the real reason we have this altercation in the first place. This:

@Astronomer

But some people genuinely don’t see how this is anti-consumer. Some people are on the fence. There is value in making noise.

I think it is very odd to call something anti-consumer when some of the consumers are really ok with it. And no matter how much noise you make, it will be dismissed if people just don’t mind the shop, which is frankly as valid as any other stance relative to it.

But since you went on and expanded on a number of curious points, it’s only polite for me to match it.

@Astronomer

I’m in the industry.

My condolences. I guess I don’t need to tell you that more unthinking consumers and less thinking consumers makes it easier to control consumer markets and therefore make your job more profitable then. By noone in the industry I guess I should’ve phrased it like ‘noone who makes large-scale decisions about the industry’ - in this I accept that I’ve been too implicit.

@Astronomer

What about anything I said is maximalistic?

This is:

@Astronomer

The goal then is to have more thinking consumers, and fewer unthinking consumers.

@Astronomer

Yes, if the trend goes unopposed, people will continue to reward this nonsense.

The first one implies some kind of a ‘goal’ that is supposed to be ‘the goal’, but there is no real context for what the definite article is actually denoting. Hence my reaction that was aimed at getting at that context, but you did not elaborate. Instead you told me what you ‘would like’ to see or people to do.
The second one implies a certain logical implication that if the trend does get opposed, it will cease to exist, which sounds correct, but the vague phrasing makes it sound like you’re trying to conflate the real opposition to the trend that can yield measurable results with a bunch of jaded guys on a backwater forum discussing a cash shop in an obscure game made by a ‘small dev team’. This last one is what made me call it maximalistic - the notion that you can save Titanic from sinking by working a bucket really vigorously.

@Astronomer

As for the latter, it seems to me nobody here thinks it is a mistake or a misunderstanding, and such a conclusion does not logically follow at all to begin with.

And it is peculiar that you don’t see the bit you quoted as a comment about how people act as opposed what everyone knows. There is an ‘as if’ in there for a reason.

@Astronomer

On this we agree, in cases of genuine melodrama.

@Astronomer

You are not the unwavering, objective beacon of cold logical light, piercing through the veil of drama and naive futile struggle in the face of corporate inevitability. I’m sorry. In this universe, we don’t need a pontifinomican to navigate the forum and decide for ourselves what is worth talking about.

“Cut the crap” indeed.

Speaking of drama.

@Astronomer

but it is better than the flacid resignation you seem to espouse.

@Astronomer

A road to nowhere and fighting a windmill is different… how? I mean don’t get me wrong, I’m a cynical soul, I can almost appreciate the omnidirectional bitterness you’re putting down, but please pick a position on what you deem futile discussion and stick to it.

@Astronomer

I guess it’s easier to have no discernible position on grubby business practise other than some supine variation of “it’s inevitable”, and look down on people for voicing objection.

I’m sorry, but if you could not discern my position, it doesn’t mean it was not discernable. Take this one post in this very thread for example:

@OrsonMaxwell

Well, never thought I’d say this, but even I find it hard to not be disappointed. Not only I was basically spot on in most things I said to the overly-pompous pseudo community cheerio post back in '20 , but FS also outdid themselves and added this and the crafting thing to this list:

@OrsonMaxwell

• the game will not run on anything but the most advanced gaming PC hardware;
• the game will have user interface that will have errors in its state machine, will lock up, loop, and generally irritate the living souls out of the players;
• the game will probably have this big tumorous growth on its side in the shape of ‘progression’ which will hinder how a player navigates and explores the forms and possibilities that the gameplay provides;
• it will be full of even kind of essential features that will be poorly realised for various different reasons.

Bravo. Something to excel at. This is peak gypsy sнit.

Take a hint?

@Astronomer

It amazes me that you came out with this, and had the temerity to say it’s me being disingenuous.

Well you make it easy:

@Astronomer

I’m expressing basic, pro-consumer sentiment, in a feedback forum.

@Astronomer

companies respond to what consumers do with their wallets.

@Astronomer

I am taking the incredibly uncontroversial position that the outlined practises are anti-consumer, and grubby. I am stating my reasons for thinking so (there are many who do not agree), and my intent not to participate in them. I encourage others not to either.

And yet:

@Astronomer

I’m not refunding the game, the core of what is there is good, I am getting my money’s worth. I just won’t be giving them any money in (macro)transactions, for reasons we apparently agree on. I don’t think others should either.

This is a package deal. You don’t get to pay half the price for the gameplay and withhold the other half because you don’t agree with how they set their live service modle up. You either pay the full price or you don’t. If you do, there appears tiny green check mark on their monitoring system that makes them conclude that they did everything right and therefore they’re getting a crapton of money on launch. Yes you can skip buying the aquilas, but the actual data about the shop’s effectiveness will not be viable for some time, while launch sales is an immediate indicator that the devs are closely watching as we speak, and that’s the one you can actually affect. So much for flacid resignation.
This kind of conflating ‘talking about’ with ‘taking a stance’ is what ultimately devalues real action by equating it with forum blabbing.
I’m all for bashing FS for what they did, what I have problem with is people starting to act all Che Guivara like they’re out to overthrow the game industry. By writing on the forums while still paying sнit devs the full price for the sнit game they made.

@Astronomer

You don’t have to be here if you don’t like the conversation.

@Astronomer

You are welcome to stop participating in the forum at any time, nobody here asked for or requires your intervention for the sake of their mental health.

Thanks for pointing at the door, but you’re not getting rid of me that easily.