this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
171 points (100.0% liked)

Games

16728 readers
306 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

EA CEO Andrew Wilson confirmed the company is considering putting ads in traditional AAA games — titles that players purchase up-front for around $70 apiece. In the Q&A part of EA’s latest earnings call, Eric Sheridan from Goldman Sachs asked Wilson about dynamic ad insertion in traditional AAA games. Wilson said, "…Advertising has an opportunity to be a meaningful driver of growth for us." He then continued, "…we have teams internally in the company right now looking at how we do very thoughtful implementations inside of our game experiences."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Or just vote with your wallet.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The review bombings have helped before. Probably everyone has an ea game in their library. Lets give it a go.

Or just vote with your wallet.

Or both.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Vote with your wallet has no impact whatsoever. It assumes people around you were informed, had similar opinions and the discipline you have. Not saying buy their games or stop voting but experience shows that its not enough for this particular problem.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It has all the impact, the problem is basically low voter turnout, not the method itself.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Not at all. Voting means going to a voting booth or mailing your vote. What you are asking is that people go against their impulses and overpower tons of marketing efforts and in many cases dark patterns that keep people addicted.

Declaring them as equal shows lack of understanding of how advanced marketing is today. They literally employ psychologists to influence people.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

All those same marketing techniques are also employed with actual elections.

My point was that "voting with your wallet" works, it is not a flaw in the method, it is a flaw in the low number of people employing it that it achieves so little. It is inherently no worse than all the other things you could do that you can't convince anyone else to join you in when protesting company's behavior. In fact I would go so far as to say that convincing yourself that you did something and then still buying their product is actually just giving in to those very same dark patterns you mention.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

We're talking about an entertainment product here though, not who's going to be the next president. Voting with your wallet always works for yourself in this case. Don't buy the ad-infested game = you don't get an ad-invested game. Simple as that.

Sure, if many people follow and nobody buys their ad-infested games, they'll change it up. But even if they don't, you still benefit by having "voted" yourself.