Feels like a scumbag moment from GGG

"

damir21#1543 wrote:

Nothing wrong with paid EA . but they could have gone a little bit more to meet us halfway .

Given keys to people who had X hours in the game .
Hosted key giveaways .
maybe some random key drops during their stream .

And for all we know, some of this is coming down the line. Am I remembering wrong if they had some sort of draws back in PoE 1 beta?

Anyhow, I don't see it as a scumbag moment to reward longtime spenders. They clearly can't/won't let everyone in, which is totally OK. There are probably a million reasons from that, from market reasons to infrastructure reasons.

They need raise money to pay for the lot of servers. They are not cheap at all.
PoE 2 is gigahyped now. So GGG expect lot of players come to try.

"

Phrazz#3529 wrote:

In this case, a lot of them are.

The thread is built on a rather subjective term; "scumbag". To take the term at face value, I don't think GGG have been neither dishonest, unkind or unpleasant. Never have they said that EA would be free. I don't find it unpleasant at all that the EA costs a small sum. And it's definitely unkind for a company to have some sort of income related to their work.

From wiki:

"

Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game.

A funding model. Pre-release. Continue development. So if it's facts you're after, you should start with your own expectations and view on what an EA is and how "free the FUNDING model should be". So maybe you're right, not all opinions are equally valid. Your opinions on what an EA is, and how "complete" PoE 2 is, are rather invalid.

Keep on the good work. I'll see you in EA.

That's a strawman so let’s be clear, it's not about whether ea is good or bad. It's about whether the ea model here is being used to sidestep the free-to-play promise and stretch the period of monetization, which many players feel is a bait-and-switch.

As for your claim that my opinions are invalid, they are shaped by the context, and when it comes to ethics and marketing, context matters far more than simple definitions or semantics. My issue isn't with ea itself, but how it's framed.

"

ShamelessWhiteknight#7976 wrote:

but how it's framed.

Doesn't matter how it's framed when you know it's a funding model. And you clearly don't care how it's framed, as you've kept overestimating the state of the game to make the framing seem... Worse.

"

ShamelessWhiteknight#7976 wrote:

"

Phrazz#3529 wrote:

In this case, a lot of them are.

The thread is built on a rather subjective term; "scumbag". To take the term at face value, I don't think GGG have been neither dishonest, unkind or unpleasant. Never have they said that EA would be free. I don't find it unpleasant at all that the EA costs a small sum. And it's definitely unkind for a company to have some sort of income related to their work.

From wiki:

"

Early access, also known as alpha access, alpha founding, paid alpha, or game preview, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game.

A funding model. Pre-release. Continue development. So if it's facts you're after, you should start with your own expectations and view on what an EA is and how "free the FUNDING model should be". So maybe you're right, not all opinions are equally valid. Your opinions on what an EA is, and how "complete" PoE 2 is, are rather invalid.

Keep on the good work. I'll see you in EA.

That's a strawman so let’s be clear, it's not about whether ea is good or bad. It's about whether the ea model here is being used to sidestep the free-to-play promise and stretch the period of monetization, which many players feel is a bait-and-switch.

As for your claim that my opinions are invalid, they are shaped by the context, and when it comes to ethics and marketing, context matters far more than simple definitions or semantics. My issue isn't with ea itself, but how it's framed.

Many players? There is like 2 of you that cant grasp a concept of what EA is.

I think we all know who the scumbag is. And seeing as how you feel that way, I don't expect to see you participating in the beta.

for any1 that has played poe1 , if any company deserve some $ for a free game , its GGG...

in other game recently (p2p game btw) they did a EA move too , if u wanted ea u had to buy the most expensive EA pack....thats a SCUMBAG MOMENT because all the EA's before were for every1 that reserved the game.

"

Warlyx#1083 wrote:

for any1 that has played poe1 , if any company deserve some $ for a free game , its GGG...

Hear, hear! I agree completely.

"

Warlyx#1083 wrote:

in other game recently (p2p game btw) they did a EA move too , if u wanted ea u had to buy the most expensive EA pack....thats a SCUMBAG MOMENT because all the EA's before were for every1 that reserved the game.

Also a solid point. It's a shame that other, greedier companies have managed to thoroughly alter what early access means, and shockingly swiftly too. The fact that gigantic AAA companies are selling "3 days of very slightly earlier access to an ostensibly 100% complete game" for $30 lately has definitely made it harder for smaller developers trying to do a genuine early access release. Scumbaggery, thy name is Blizzard...

So the compressed version of the complaint is that "although we're getting free stuff, we're not getting it now and damn it, I want my free stuff NOW!!"

"

AlvinL_#4492 wrote:

So the compressed version of the complaint is that "although we're getting free stuff, we're not getting it now and damn it, I want my free stuff NOW!!"

It essentially boils down to whether you think it's scummy to claim a game is Free to play and end up charging for it. I have yet to see this rational argument as to why it isn't.

The main defence of GGG seems to be the argument that it's EA and not release, therefore it's okay.

This is just semantics. This is the release of POE2 and GGG are treating it as such.

1) Delaying the launch, to beef up server infrastructure and make sure MTX works

2) Available for purchase on steam, the largest game store on the planet.
(poe1 could not be played on steam until release)

3) Sending the game out to reviewers and media companies to advertise it.


I find it fascinating that those defending GGG are the ones getting triggered at opinions other than their own. But that is what happens when you get people to pay for something. Once they have purchased the product, they assign ownership to it, and It biases their ability to be impartial