Thread 724724280

Has "voting with your wallet" ever actually worked? I don't mean a game that pissed off even the normies so it largely didn't profit. I mean a game that pissed off a group or just a decent amount of players, who actually banded together to vote with their wallets and it ACTUALLY offsetting the profits from the general playerbase still playing and paying the game

You've missunderstood the concept. You vote with your wallet by buying the company that makes the stuff that you want to "vote" about

>>724724280 (OP)
Here you go.

gamers are too addicted to eating shit, they will never muster up the willpower to change anything

>someone has been posting this image over and over since 2016
What causes this autism? What is it about this image that made someone go "yep, next 10 years of my life I'm posting THIS"

>>724724478
I very clearly meant in vidya because this is a vidya board you numpkin

>>724724280 (OP)
Microsoft - Redfall - 10,000+ Employees Laid Off
Blizzard Entertainment - Diablo IV - 100+ Employees Laid Off
Ubisoft - Assassin’s Creed Mirage - 200+ Employees Laid Off
Square Enix - Final Fantasy XVI - 1,000+ Employees Laid Off
Bungie - Destiny 2 - 100+ Employees Laid Off
PlayStation - Horizon Forbidden West - 200+ Employees Laid Off
Telltale Games - The Expanse: A Telltale Series - Studio Closed, 250+ Employees Laid Off
Harmonix - Fuser - Studio Closed, 100+ Employees Laid Off
Luminous Productions (Square Enix) - Forspoken - Studio Closed, 40+ Employees Laid Off
V1 Interactive - Disintegration - Studio Closed, 30+ Employees Laid Off
Volition (Deep Silver) - Saints Row (2022) - Studio Closed, 100+ Employees Laid Off
Motive Studios (EA) - Star Wars: Squadrons - Studio Restructured, 50+ Employees Laid Off

>>724724894
N-N-NOOOO DELETE THIS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DEMORALIZED I HAVE LITERALLY BEEN POSTING THIS SINCE 2015 YOU CAN'T JUST NEGATE A DECADE OF MY LIFE

>>724724871
Here's a follow up in relation to voting with your wallet in the video games industry

Its not voting with your wallet is just not buying shitty games. everyone wants to put some greater well being in to video game buying for retarded reasons, just dont buy the game or do, and discuss whatever reasons you have and leave it at that.

>>724724894
>ffxiv
Why the actual fuck does a game dev team need 1000 employees, what the hell, how do you even coordinate such bloat

>>724725072
>>724724894
well I stand corrected, thanks lads

>>724725126
that's XVI, not XIV

>>724724863
>>someone has been posting this image over and over since 2016
Try 2009.
It was notable for being one of the earliest incidents, and in a time when people were a lot more optimistic and had more trust in the industry.

>>724725290
My guess is the image was first created to just make fun of CoD fags, but some people, like the OP, thought it was a great way to demoralize people that always talk about refusing to buy games as an effect measure of protest against shitty game devs. What's weird is that the OP has to have lived under a rock to not see >>724724894, and he doesn't even mention low hanging fruit Dragon Age Vanguard or Concord. "Voting with your wallet" turns out it actually is effective.

>>724724280 (OP)
It works every time because my money doesn't go where I don't want it to.

>>724724280 (OP)
Yeah, the problem is it only works when the target audience/consumer is involved. So boycotting a game you were never going to buy doesn't work

Money is fake. It's about the message, it doesn't matter how many of these disgusting products fail, the point is that we can't have good things anymore.

What are you even talking about?

Yes, 100% success rate.

If I don't buy bad games I don't play bad games.

>>724725290
1€ ≠ 1$ is one of the earliest steam things i can remember. also the left4dead2 one.

>>724724280 (OP)
plenty of boycotts work, especially in the age of live service games

fomo can get you to buy a game, but a bad live service game that you start boycotting is a death sentence
live service games live and die by their continued community engagement, once it turns negative, it's near impossible to retake it, you have to have a massive commitment from the shareholders to hold the line at a quarterly deficit for an indeterminate amount of time until the games population stops freefalling

eventually you get to a plateau of fans that won't boycott or leave, and then you can begin to heal and get positive growth again, but it's almost impossible to do this due to all the conflicting variables that come with a live service product

>>724724280 (OP)
>>724724871
Concord seems like they heard people not buying the game at all.

>>724725290
>>724726762
"Not balanced for lean"

Pretty sure this wasn't a success

>>724724280 (OP)
Of course. It's one of the reasons why the Japanese indie and oktaku industries are shaped the way they are.

Gacha games in particular are extreme outliers of this in action. A million dollar gacha can pivot on just 5 people sometimes.

Yes and no. Voting with your wallet as a concept is bound to fail because you're inherently trying to fight against something that you and others give a shit about, in which case you're in the minority.

The true execution is just not giving a fuck. Look at fucking Concord and the shitstorm that came afterwards, journoscum saying that people who don't want to buy shitty looking games are economic terrorists for, well, not wanting to buy a game that looks like a waste of money. You see it happening a lot of late where companies keep pulling out godawful overpriced games that people just don't want to buy and start sneeding about not getting their rightful shekels from 'em.

>>724725072
Note that the AI is drawing from "the gamer" as a source on why some boycotts fail. You should of course be skeptical because of their track record.

>>724724376
Based as fuck. l'chaim.

>>724724376
this
voting only works if you cast a ballot
an indie game that sells 1000 units lifetime is going to be infinitely more impacted by someone purchasing, enjoying, and talking about the game than some AAA slop that sells 10 million units guaranteed regardless of quality

>>724725630
Because OP was clearly setting up the special pleading that Veilguard and Concord don't count, because that was a normie rejection. OR possibly that Veilguard succeeded, if he's that kind of retarded.

>>724724280 (OP)
Yes, but only if you use it proactively.
Instead of boycotting things you don't like, you have to start funding things you do like.
This requires actual organization though to prevent stealth campaigners, shills, and grifters from taking over.

The "voting" part does not work because propaganda games were not expected to sell to begin with.

What works is the understanding that you personally don't have to consume media that you don't like, which is toughly where gaming is now: only subtlem propaganda gets through, while open blatant propaganda games don't get any audience. This makes propaganda peddlers piss and shit themselves, that's why they are so mad about the Chuddah meme and keep making the "voting with wallet" threads.

Anything that could hurt profits, margins and control is taken away from you systematically
Thinking into hurting a corporation back is radicalism

So voting with your wallet soon will not be enough. You will get your wallet monitored soon as well, as much as guns and speech.

>>724727996
>Based as fuck. l'chaim.
Not really even "memeing". I sometimes get invites to vote because I own couple shares of some company. If buying shares of company and being invited to vote isn't the definition of voting with your wallet then I don't know what is.

>>724724280 (OP)

The problem with "voting with your wallet" is that you can only vote "No" once - while other people can vote "Yes" as many times as they want. By and large it doesn't work because there's always gonna be more casuals that don't mind blowing the money on a game they play a few times and then shelve, or "just wanna zone out after work" and don't care about how shit a game is if they can get their dopamine hit for a few hours a week.

i don't care if it works or doesn't
if i don't like something i just don't buy it
for example, i have never given EA money ever since they killed westwood

>>724728126
Clearly defining terms at the beginning of discussion isn't a logical fallacy though

>>724724894
Chuddha says that nothing ever happened. 10k laid off? 10k new jeets from India hired. 3 million dollars lost? 3 more million printed.

Nothing ever happens.

Money is rigged against us. We have to flip the table over and take things back.

>>724728720
Correct. However, using those definitions to premptively recontextualize the arguments instead of just clarification is for polemics, not logical arguments. Or at the very least cause significant confusion.

OP's frame implies there's a distinction between "pissed off normies" and "a decent amount of players voting with their wallets".

You see some of the shit journalist sites take that angle. The chuds are small in number, and economically worthless. All the failures were from mismanagement. Not being able to capture the mainstream appeal. They're insisting on marginalizing the "protestors" as separate from the mainstream views.

>>724725072
none of those boycotts were impactful at all you retarded chatbot

>>724724894
Some of those were already doomed from the beginning regardless of people boycotting it. Who the fuck would have genuinely bought Forspoken? It was a game to scam a publisher at best.

>>724730229
>premptively recontextualize the arguments
Weird way of saying "clearly defining terms"
>Or at the very least cause significant confusion.
Absolutely correct most people are only going to read OP's 1st sentence
>OP's frame implies there's a distinction between "pissed off normies" and "a decent amount of players voting with their wallets".
That's not how I read his post
Here
>and it ACTUALLY offsetting the profits from the general playerbase still playing and paying the game
It sounds like he's making a distinction between games that never stood a chance like Dustborn and games whose trajectory was affected
>They're insisting on marginalizing the "protestors" as separate from the mainstream views.
I didn't read that at all in OP's post
I mean tautologically there's an objective distinction between those actively engaged in a protest and those who aren't but there was no value judgment implications in OP's post, no "marginalization"