@jenovaschilld: If you sincerely think this will in any way be passed onto the consumers, I think you severely underestimate greed and never ending demand to slash operating costs. You implied this would makes games cost less for consumers, which is never going to happen.
@jenovaschilld:Yeeeeahhhh, but... the way businesses operate, you're not going to see any benefit from their cost savings. It's all about maximizing profitability, which appeals to shareholders, and drives the value of your company up. None of this has resulted in lower prices, despite companies' never ending emphasis on cutting costs and having as little overhead as possible. They only care about profits and shareholders, not giving you and I a better value.
Anyone who thinks this will benefit the consumer financially is living in a fantasy land. Games will end up costing more for you, even if it is less for them to make. They'll charge the absolute maximum the market will bare, DLC, MTs and all. Resale is based on market value, which is never going to decrease as a result of this or anything else, therefore this won't have an impact on resale, either.
If anything, it has the potential to completely **** over/kill resales, should publishers implement some kind of license/drm system. So, the opposite.
@doodoflife: I'm glad someone noticed this. Funny how open comment, live versions have at most a few dozen upvotes, but comment locked ones can have a couple thousand upvotes in very little time at all. This isn't the first time I've seen something mildly political, non-game related get this magical treatment. While it COULD be something linked in social media pushing extra interaction, judging by all other engagement on this site that is non-political, it's probably tampered with. I don't buy it either, frankly.
@esqueejy: Are you referring to general media when you say "it"? I'm going to assume it's a yes, otherwise I have no clue what it'd be in reference to.
If so, that would be a deeper issue (beyond me, really), in my opinion. How information is presented to a person and what information a person is directed to is never done with the intent to provide objective, unbiased content. It's not about discovery, it's about commerce. The internet itself, and the monetized background of everything we do incentivizes moving people towards their own biases to keep them more engaged, and less challenged or likely to click away. The result is more instances of pockets of homogenized thought, where you can easily find someone to reinforce any shitty old idea. Flat earth, as an example.
@bu1ld0g: I wouldn't know, probably more ignorance than fear. It depends on how deep you really want to dig into people's motivations, but fear in some form (fear of a country/society shifting away from their deeply embedded world views and throwing a tantrum?), possibly. Though... eh.. relevance?
I get the intent of her statement, though - something I doubt anyone on the polar opposite side of the isle as her is probably willing to bother with. Dehumanizing an entire group of people and subtracting them from society because they are different in some way is a dangerous thing for us to become desensitized to, let alone endorse.
Even in the case of Nazi germany, at the threat of coming across as insane as her, it was (in some cases relevant) grievances with the jewish commercial institutions/banks that came first, before moving onto the people as a whole more aggressively. It's not difficult to expand on a horrible precedent, once you've found your in-route.
The comment could be considered insensitive, even ignorant to a degree, but I would not label her comment antisemitic even slightly. I don't know what else she posted prior, but on it's own it's a pretty weak reason to fire/cancel a person. She should have known how that was going to fly and never posted it, though. I don't mess with social media at all, and I know that much.
She's not wrong, though - at least in the historical context. The mass propaganda built up a tremendous amount of undeserved contempt from the population towards jewish folk, long before the atrocities history skips right into happened. It created a resentment in the population, to where most people turned a blind eye to what was happening. People didn't just magically hate jewish people overnight because the fuhrer said so, they were conditioned to.
While I wouldn't draw the parallels she did, there IS a lesson to be learned from that particular aspect of german history and how it relates to how social media/msm can very handily guide public perception and sentiment towards any group it wills, whether inadvertent or intentionally. Whether it be based on race, religion, gender, or yeah.. political views, the danger of vilifying an entire group of people in general has never ended well.
midgar's comments