Comments for I Blog With My Face

Comment on The Real Me by Bret Hewes

Bret Hewes — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 21:29:27 +0000

I posted with my real name! Oh noes!
While I, myself, was not moved to care much about this, neither was I completely for it. I do feel the concerns raised are about the distribution of identity over the internet, a sore spot for many given our public conciousness now at a level of ‘identity theft can happen if you share anything personal over the internet’, are semi-valid. Many friends won’t sign up for RealID for similar reasons, even though I would -love- being able to communicate with them when I’m playing SC2 and they’re on WoW. So it goes. Also, old news is old, my friend

Comment on The Real Me by Lark

Lark — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 19:30:04 +0000

“- It will not eliminate/significantly reduce trolling.” I’m curious if this is true or not. There will always be some assholes out there, but when people make assholish statements with their names attached there can be social retribution. Eliminating trolling would require eliminating human players, I think, so it’s an exaggerated goal. While the fear of harassment is a real one and the threat of unwanted internet stalkers a real one I have the hope that realizing who you are playing with (women, folks who aren’t cisgendered, people who may have a sexual orientation or background that is different) would make those people less Other.

Does the original motivation behind Blizzard’s plan fall into the same category of zeitgeist as the Facebook “no one needs privacy in this modern age!”?

Comment on Yarr. by Snagger

Snagger — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 20:06:38 +0000

You, sir, are beginning to slip into a rather dangerous habit of writing blog entries with which I totally agree. You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

I think it is worth repeating that there is only one group of people who are affected or even mildly inconvenienced by these obsessively stringent anti-piracy measures. The paying consumer.

The paying consumer is the one who has to sit through 5 minute unskippable FBI warnings before movies. The paying consumer is the one who has to pay exorbitant amounts for CDs in order to fund the record company’s war on piracy. The paying consumer, as you pointed out above, is the one who doesn’t get to run around Italy killing people if their internet goes out.

The pirates don’t even skip a beat. After all, most of the work is done by someone else, someone who enjoys cracking programs. The pirate doesn’t have to deal with any of the things listed above, and this gives them a feeling of justification. It makes them feel that they are triumphing over The Evil Corporation.

I don’t know what the solution is, or even if there is one, but this ain’t it.

Comment on Yarr. by Bret

Bret — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:52:52 +0000

Didn’t mention EA despite my communication with you about it prior to posting this? Hmph. I think the only way for these big game companies to sit up and take notice about piracy is not to crack down harder on it by employing rather draconian measures for their paying customers, but for the customers to sit up and say, “Hey, this is BS and we’re not going to take it.” Why should you have to have an on-line connection and remain thusly connected for playing a single-player game? If a game has multi-player in an on-line feature, why can’t it be played in off-line mode for single-player? (Or even installed? I’m looking at you Command and Conquer 4)
As a clerk in the retail side of things, trying to drum up excitement about the next new game is difficult if I also have to mention to the would be buyer that it requires a dedicated internet connection to the game company’s servers.
Pirates exist, thieves exist, people exist who want to take your shit. The harder the lockdown the more the ‘challenge’ to those who crack the code and the more justified the criminal feels in taking that item that everyone else pays for the privledge of having. Additionally, there’s no where near the loss of revenue these game companies seem to feel that there is due to piracy. I am curious about the loss of sales due to piracy and the amount spent into developing DRM and other anti-piracy measures, if they equal out or if they spend more on the development of anti-piracy techniques.
Frankly it’s pretty disgusting, a big finger to the computer gamer, and even the console gamer has to endure some of this idiotcy (EA games on consoles require a dedicated connection for DLC [though I surmise also for some Big Brotherism] )

Comment on Yarr. by Jupiter

Jupiter — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:19:30 +0000

I think what you’ve hit on here, at least with the JoCo vs the RIAA example, is that not all pirates are fullblown, DRM-cracking maniacs who pirate for the sake of piracy. Your average pirate is like, “I don’t have enough money to buy everything I want. I would feel bad about ripping off a nice guy like Jonathan Coulton… but I certainly don’t care about those assholes at the RIAA.” So we pay for JoCo, because he’s not an asshole, and we don’t pay for, say, Kid Rock (because: asshole), and to “protect” themselves, the RIAA becomes more and more assholeish… giving us more and more reason to not feel bad about piracy. It’s a self-perpetuating system, and kudos to JoCo for trying to break it – I’ll give him my hard-earned dollars any day.

Comment on Yarr. by ShyGuy

ShyGuy — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 01:08:11 +0000

This sums up my understanding of the situation pretty well. My view is that eventually, over the next 20 or so years, it’s going to become obvious that digital goods can’t be sold and controlled in the same way as tangible items. Those who refuse to adapt and come up with new methods of creating revenue will lose.

It’s not their fault, of course. Most pirates will agree that what they’re doing is at least a “little” wrong, regardless of their justifications. But that’s the reality of the situation; accept it and adapt, or face the music.

(or game, in this case!)

Comment on Consent of the Gamers by Tabor

Tabor — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:40:09 +0000

@Elegbara
Pssht. No idea, he says. Salitheion. AKA Chris.

Comment on Consent of the Gamers by Elegbara

Elegbara — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 13:42:49 +0000

@Tabor Ok, Im not sure who Sal is, but I have a character on QD if you can put me in touch with them.

Comment on Consent of the Gamers by Tabor

Tabor — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 17:37:01 +0000

Can’t hurt. Talk to Sal.

Comment on Consent of the Gamers by Elegbara

Elegbara — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:10:00 +0000

Hey, this is kind of an odd question for Tabor, but does your guild have any real use for a well geared warrior tank? You can check me out on Armory, I’m the only level 80 Urgror, and considering a realm hop.