Epic Legion wrote...
People, please stop being naive. This is 100% fake.
Getterray wrote...
astranger_90 wrote...
Technically if this is a common thing with developers, it is ethical. Because then it would be the standard or accepted professional behavior.
Appeal to the masses. Just because others do it doesn't make it ethical. Do you think its ethical that factories dump sewage into rivers, killing the wildlife and water supply of neighbouring towns just because a lot of companies do it?
Stanley W00 wrote...
End of Line.
astranger_90 wrote...
Getterray wrote...
astranger_90 wrote...
Technically if this is a common thing with developers, it is ethical. Because then it would be the standard or accepted professional behavior.
Appeal to the masses. Just because others do it doesn't make it ethical. Do you think its ethical that factories dump sewage into rivers, killing the wildlife and water supply of neighbouring towns just because a lot of companies do it?
Again, I was being extremely literal. Because Ethical means "Being in accordance with the rules or standards of a profession."
astranger_90 wrote...
Do people honestly get this upset by it?
I mean, the whole Metacritic (YOUR GAME HAS TO SCORE A PERFECT 100) system is the reason we're getting games that shy away from being innovative, and focus on things that will sell well.
I mean, how many games like... Killer7 have come out recently? Games that have actually tried something new instead of just having the same stuff you see day in and day out in video games these days?
spica09 wrote...
Something being common does not make them accepted rules or standards. They're simply common.
Stanley W00 wrote...
End of Line.
Linksicle wrote...
no, the reason why we're getting less innovative games is because dirtbags like Bobby Kotick and John Riccitiello are running things instead of programmers and people who actually develop or even play video games. they just want to make money. who cares if the game is good? that's the motivation behind this. EA got greedy, rushed Bioware and they pushed out a half-finished turd of a game, bits of corn and all, and not even paying off reviewers can hide the truth. so now Bioware is doing a giant PR blitz, from banning anyone who says anything negative about them or EA, to falsifying metacritic scores.
it's not at all surprising though, no.
Korban wrote...
http://i.imgur.com/BEZOe.png
So unethical. This should be illegal.
BioWare did so much crap with this game. Their credibility is next to none just because of DA2.
How about going back to what BioWare does and make great games instead of focusing on making an "ok" game with all these crappy marketing.
astranger_90 wrote...
Linksicle wrote...
no, the reason why we're getting less innovative games is because dirtbags like Bobby Kotick and John Riccitiello are running things instead of programmers and people who actually develop or even play video games. they just want to make money. who cares if the game is good? that's the motivation behind this. EA got greedy, rushed Bioware and they pushed out a half-finished turd of a game, bits of corn and all, and not even paying off reviewers can hide the truth. so now Bioware is doing a giant PR blitz, from banning anyone who says anything negative about them or EA, to falsifying metacritic scores.
it's not at all surprising though, no.
Pretty much what I was saying but in a different way.
astranger_90 wrote...
spica09 wrote...
Something being common does not make them accepted rules or standards. They're simply common.
Okay, so this is me just being the devils advocate. But the definition of standard is "Something considered by general conset as a basis of comparison."
So, taking them both as literal, I would say that being overly common does infact make something the standard, and thus would make certain things ethical. If not morally correct.
Modifié par spica09, 14 mars 2011 - 09:47 .
Cutlass Jack wrote...
Nefarious13 wrote...
This is depressing. Is this what my beloved rpg genre has sunken to? Writing reviews on your own game? Boo is rolling over in his shoebox.
If you believe everything anyone has blogged on the interweb, then yes. You should be depressed.
Roseking wrote...
But what if someone used that name knowing someone will track it down linking it to BioWare than clam BioWare is pading reviews?
Also 4chan is now looking into bringing light to "fake" reviews? They mostly creat them.
Stanley W00 wrote...
End of Line.
Obro wrote...
Roseking wrote...
But what if someone used that name knowing someone will track it down linking it to BioWare than clam BioWare is pading reviews?
Also 4chan is now looking into bringing light to "fake" reviews? They mostly creat them.
Oh please this is not Kennedy assassination.
Also the key words in your post are WHAT IF
Modifié par Alastanir, 14 mars 2011 - 09:54 .
Getterray wrote...
This whole affair is even more disgusting after David Gaider tried to blame 4chan.
spica09 wrote...
No, because they're not accepted. What you're arguing would make anything that happens a lot completely ok, when it isnt. Using ilterality is a mistake in and of itself because it is completely insufficient when dealing with language. It's why fiigurative forms of speech are essential. I dont see why you're playing devil's advocate, you're essentially saying it's ok for bioware to engeage in conflicts of interest without trying to get caught. It only makes them look bad.
Vice-Admiral von Titsling wrote...
Getterray wrote...
This whole affair is even more disgusting after David Gaider tried to blame 4chan.
...Please tell me you're trolling and he didn't actually say that
Stanley W00 wrote...
End of Line.
Retour en haut
