Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Bloggers Busted by LodestoneFollow

#1 Nov 04 2010 at 7:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
**
641 posts
A while back, I posted a translation of Square Enix's Stories of EORZEA page, and gave a look at the initial entries for six Japanese writers. The idea was that these contributers would bring their adventures to life in blog form. Ideally, their entires would show how a wide variety of people could all find something in Eorzea to enjoy. Unfortunately, the Lodestone site recently activated a History and Achievements feature, and as FFXIVBlog.com reports, Japanese players quickly sensed something was amiss.

Article
____________________________
JPButton | Twitter
#2 Nov 04 2010 at 8:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Mistress of Gardening
Avatar
*****
14,661 posts
Wow. =\
#3 Nov 04 2010 at 8:01 PM Rating: Excellent
**
465 posts
Not exactly helping the trust factor...
____________________________
Lodestone
#4 Nov 04 2010 at 8:02 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
492 posts
Silly SE, why do you keep shooting yourselves in the foot? lol
____________________________
FFXI : Ryobi & Ryder Asura
FFXIV : Bracken Wood Gridania-Balmung

[ffxivsig]dd56e309af6849f1ae5797cc1681e494[/ffxivsig]
#5 Nov 04 2010 at 8:05 PM Rating: Decent
**
608 posts
lol a marketing thing for a company that sells you stuff??? OMG this cant be, why would they want to sell you something.
#6 Nov 04 2010 at 8:20 PM Rating: Excellent
**
422 posts
Absolutely hilarious!!!!

Busted by there own new feature. Priceless.
#7 Nov 04 2010 at 8:40 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
350 posts
Maybe I too can pretend like I am actually having fun in FFXIV if someone else writes up some adventures for me! :P
#8 Nov 04 2010 at 8:44 PM Rating: Excellent
Sadly typical marketing BS.

Has any one ever seen those TV commercials with the California Happy Cows? You know, California cows are happier, so their milk and cheese is better? You know the cows they show, what part of California they're from? Saint Charles, Illinois. Yea, those commercials were shot on location with cows from the Lenkaitis Holsteins dairy farm in Illinois.

Marketing types don't give a crap whether any thing is true as long as it COULD be true.

Edited, Nov 4th 2010 10:45pm by KarlHungis
#9 Nov 04 2010 at 8:53 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
802 posts
Well, I guess its another reason for SE to take another look at their own marketing department.
____________________________


#10 Nov 04 2010 at 9:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
42 posts
KarlHungis Delivers on Time wrote:
Sadly typical marketing BS.

Has any one ever seen those TV commercials with the California Happy Cows? You know, California cows are happier, so their milk and cheese is better? You know the cows they show, what part of California they're from? Saint Charles, Illinois. Yea, those commercials were shot on location with cows from the Lenkaitis Holsteins dairy farm in Illinois.

Marketing types don't give a crap whether any thing is true as long as it COULD be true.

Edited, Nov 4th 2010 10:45pm by KarlHungis


I can't speak for Japan, but in Taiwan, this kind of thing is rampant. I don't believe anything I see in commercials or variety shows here. I've had media types here ask me to come on and talk about things like ghost stories or public services in New York (for a press conference no less!), etc. When I told them I'd never seen a ghost, or I'd never been to New York, they said, "Well, just come in, and we'll place a fake call to [New York Public Hotline (e.g. 911)], and you can share your experiences as if you were from New York." This is pretty much par for the course for the media in Asia as far as I can tell. I hesitate to extend these experiences to Japan, but I am pretty sure the Taiwanese media didn't come up with these tactics themselves (like most things they do).
____________________________
#11 Nov 04 2010 at 9:35 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
Elmer, your sig takes about 10 seconds to load for me every time I open one of your posts and holds up loading the rest of the page.

On topic, I'm not sure why people are blaming SE for this. Sure, they probably tossed some yen at some celebrities as part of the marketing shenanigan, but celebrities don't endorse things for free on a regular basis anywhere in the world. Why anyone would think they'd be doing it out of the kindess of their heart is beyond me. They were paid to do a job and a couple of them did a little scamming. Not cool, but doubtful it was behavior that SE encouraged.
#12 Nov 04 2010 at 9:50 PM Rating: Good
**
472 posts
Stop having karaoke parties and have your Iphone turned on, to post to your Facebook page, and accidentally post about FFXIV, when you meant to describe your favorite song on Facebook :P
#13 Nov 04 2010 at 10:09 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
107 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Elmer, your sig takes about 10 seconds to load for me every time I open one of your posts and holds up loading the rest of the page.

On topic, I'm not sure why people are blaming SE for this. Sure, they probably tossed some yen at some celebrities as part of the marketing shenanigan, but celebrities don't endorse things for free on a regular basis anywhere in the world. Why anyone would think they'd be doing it out of the kindess of their heart is beyond me. They were paid to do a job and a couple of them did a little scamming. Not cool, but doubtful it was behavior that SE encouraged.



Does the word deception mean anything to you?

It's not just that these celeberities are endorsing a product. It's that they (or SE) went out of their way to falsify information on how these people are interacting with the product.

Anyway, I hope this gets picked up by some bigger gaming news outlets. I'm getting really tired of the BS Squenix has been putting out as of late.
#14 Nov 04 2010 at 10:10 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
691 posts
I see now, so it was exactly what Blizzard did with Mr T and William Shatner..

Then again, 3 of the celeb characters actually seem to be somewhat active, which is understandable considering their busy schedules. Mr T. and Shatner never even played the game at all.


小暮ふさのり Azurite Millionarms
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=1109497
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player05/index.html

斉藤かよこ Cocoan Cranberry
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=1767643
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player02/index.html

岩崎夏海 Huck Finn
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=2261143
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player01/index.html

太陽 Day Star
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=2291443
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player03/index.html

佐藤明子 Satominn Verte
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=2354377
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player04/index.html

漆野古枝 Jyuubee Yagyuu
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=2792356
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player06/index.html

加藤夏希 Rina Katou
http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com...cicuid=4051936
http://stories.finalfantasyxiv.com/player07/index.html


Taken from the actual article.

Edited, Nov 4th 2010 11:19pm by Uryuu
#15 Nov 04 2010 at 10:12 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
186 posts
RyderDecree wrote:
Silly SE, why do you keep shooting yourselves in the foot? lol


They've already shot all their toes off, now they going for the rest of the leg. I believe we're at the knee cap now.
#16 Nov 04 2010 at 10:28 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
Nutchoss wrote:
Does the word deception mean anything to you?

It's not just that these celeberities are endorsing a product. It's that they (or SE) went out of their way to falsify information on how these people are interacting with the product.

Anyway, I hope this gets picked up by some bigger gaming news outlets. I'm getting really tired of the BS Squenix has been putting out as of late.


You missed the point. The standard crew of SE cynics is jumping on this like they've got proof positive that SE was/is okay with their hired celebrities making false entries about their experiences in the game. If Mr. T was blogging about his adventures in WoW on the o-boards and it was found out that he was making the entries but not actually playing the game, who would be to blame? Him or Blizzard?

So much rage directed at SE. I know it won't change, but geez...you'd think there were smarter people in the world.
#17 Nov 04 2010 at 10:42 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
551 posts
Aurelius wrote:
Nutchoss wrote:
Does the word deception mean anything to you?

It's not just that these celeberities are endorsing a product. It's that they (or SE) went out of their way to falsify information on how these people are interacting with the product.

Anyway, I hope this gets picked up by some bigger gaming news outlets. I'm getting really tired of the BS Squenix has been putting out as of late.


You missed the point. The standard crew of SE cynics is jumping on this like they've got proof positive that SE was/is okay with their hired celebrities making false entries about their experiences in the game. If Mr. T was blogging about his adventures in WoW on the o-boards and it was found out that he was making the entries but not actually playing the game, who would be to blame? Him or Blizzard?

So much rage directed at SE. I know it won't change, but geez...you'd think there were smarter people in the world.


Difference is, Mr. T and Shatner aren't blogging about their ingame activity, now are they?

And who is responsible? The company paying the money, that's who. I don't give a crap whether it was marketings decision or SE told marketing to do it. SE pays for the marketing. SE therefore is responsible for what is marketed.

So many people on these boards willing and ready to blindly defend SE no matter what. It's friggin' hilarious. You'd think there were smarter people in the world.

Edited, Nov 5th 2010 12:43am by Zorvan
____________________________



#18 Nov 04 2010 at 11:03 PM Rating: Good
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Aurelius wrote:
You missed the point. The standard crew of SE cynics is jumping on this like they've got proof positive that SE was/is okay with their hired celebrities making false entries about their experiences in the game. If Mr. T was blogging about his adventures in WoW on the o-boards and it was found out that he was making the entries but not actually playing the game, who would be to blame? Him or Blizzard?

So much rage directed at SE. I know it won't change, but geez...you'd think there were smarter people in the world.
SE hasn't exactly earned credibility though. Hard to say if the post got deleted because people found it out to be a fraud and SE is on damage control, or that their writer got lazy/went rogue and posted something he just made up. Given how poor the release has gone so far, it could go either way. Maybe the writer was just so frustrated with the game that he couldn't muster the willpower to play long enough to write a tale about his adventures.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#19Aurelius, Posted: Nov 04 2010 at 11:15 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) You're obviously not a business owner. I can instruct staff all day long but at the end of the day I have no legal entitlement to force them to do anything regardless of how much I pay them. And it demoralizes people with the quickness when you're constantly standing over them to make sure they're doing what you asked them to do. So you explain the task and leave them to it and if it isn't done, you give them a bit of a nudge or you find someone else to do it. And if I say to a property owner that I have a crew coming in to do some work on X day at Y time and that crew doesn't show up, does that mean I lied to the property owner? (Hint: No.) It means something went sideways and I need to take responsibility and fix it, but how I go about doing that can be approached from many different angles. It's when people jump from, "Ya, they really dropped the ball" to "OH MY ******* GOD THEY LIED TO US!!" that the bigger picture starts to come into play. Cynicism doesn't bring you any closer to reality.
#20 Nov 04 2010 at 11:27 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
551 posts
Aurelius wrote:


It was a hypothetical. u r kan understand hypothetical?


Sure, I understand hypothetical. Hypothetically speaking, can you be a bigger @#%^ than I've already seen you try to be to people on these forums? You are not any smarter than most if not all the other posters I've seen here, so stow the ego, bub.

Quote:

You're obviously not a business owner. I can instruct staff all day long but at the end of the day I have no legal entitlement to force them to do anything regardless of how much I pay them. And it demoralizes people with the quickness when you're constantly standing over them to make sure they're doing what you asked them to do. So you explain the task and leave them to it and if it isn't done, you give them a bit of a nudge or you find someone else to do it. And if I say to a property owner that I have a crew coming in to do some work on X day at Y time and that crew doesn't show up, does that mean I lied to the property owner? (Hint: No.) It means something went sideways and
    I need to take responsibility and fix it
, but how I go about doing that can be approached from many different angles. It's when people jump from, "Ya, they really dropped the ball" to "OH MY @#%^ING GOD THEY LIED TO US!!" that the bigger picture starts to come into play. Cynicism doesn't bring you any closer to reality.


And thanks for saying I'm right while trying to show me I'm wrong. I underlined and bolded so you'd find it easy and wouldn't strain yourself too much.

By the way, if you were really a business owner, then you'd realize you very well can do something legally to those you hire if they do something to damage your company's reputation. It's called a lawsuit. So when I see SE filing claims against their marketing agents after FIRING them (something else they can legally do as business owners, but I'm sure you already know that, right?:p), then I'll agree it wasn't SE that screwed up.

Edited, Nov 5th 2010 1:39am by Zorvan
____________________________



#21 Nov 04 2010 at 11:35 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
676 posts
It's sad that SE needed to resort to tactics like this. I can understand their frustration in not having a launch go to plan, but marketing like this only digs a deeper grave for the future of FFXIV. Apparently one of the bloggers received a ton of hate mail after the incident (which, by the way I do not condone), so this has clearly done more harm than good.

To be honest though, the Lodestone always seemed a bit big brother-ish, with every little action being detailed for anyone to see. It's a bit like living in a fish bowl, but without the free food. It's always nice to be able to display your accomplishments, but it still feels a bit odd to have your own in-game autobiography available to all.
____________________________

FFXI: Siren Server: Seiowan Lvl 99 WHM, SCH, BLM
FFXIV: Ragnarok Server: Lemuria Glitterhands All Classes 50
#22 Nov 04 2010 at 11:40 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
Zorvan wrote:
And thanks for saying I'm right while trying to show me I'm wrong. I underlined and bolded so you'd find it easy and wouldn't strain yourself too much.

By the way, if you were really a business owner, then you'd realize you very well can do something legally to those you hire if they do something to damage your company's reputation. It's called a lawsuit. So when I see SE filing claims against their marketing agents, then I'll agree it wasn't SE that screwed up.


Whether SE files suit or not has absolutely no bearing on whether or not this was them willfully trying to deceive their customers. And what you do with someone after the fact doesn't change the fact that you have no legal entitlement to force an employee, subcontractor, or consultant to do anything. They can refuse anything they want to refuse and experience consequences for it, but that still doesn't mean you can make them do the job. Example, if you will:

I hire Bob's Painting Company as a subcontractor to paint a suite I'm renovating. I pay them a percentage of their quoted fee up front. They turn around and say they're not going to do the job for whatever reason. Can I force them to do the job? No. Can I force them through the courts to repay what I gave them? Yes. But does that mean I've forced them to do the job? No. And does it make me a liar for telling my client that the suite would be painted by such-and-such time because the plans I made to have it done fell through? No.

If you don't like the "ego", don't make stupid comments.

Edited, Nov 4th 2010 10:41pm by Aurelius
#23 Nov 04 2010 at 11:40 PM Rating: Good
Having people in a commercial about a game is completely different than false blogs being payed for by the company to make it look like people are in the game. It takes some real suspension of reality to try to equivocate these two things. Aurelius, you more than anyone needs to take a step back, because you blindly and rudely attack constantly to defend SE. You're going to come back sometime and look at your posts and be ashamed.
____________________________
Die! Die die die. die die die die, die die. - Scarlet Briar
#24 Nov 04 2010 at 11:44 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
digitalcraft, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Having people in a commercial about a game is completely different than false blogs being payed for by the company to make it look like people are in the game. It takes some real suspension of reality to try to equivocate these two things. Aurelius, you more than anyone needs to take a step back, because you blindly and rudely attack constantly to defend SE. You're going to come back sometime and look at your posts and be ashamed.


Oh, smarten up. The point I've been making is that people are saying SE was being deceitful because the blogs were falsified. Nobody has any proof at all that SE wrote the blogs. Is it so far fetched to give SE the benefit of the doubt that they paid these people thinking that because they were being paid they'd actually do what they were asked to do and play the game and blog about it instead of making false entries? Blame the people who wrote the blogs until you've got proof otherwise. It's called objectivity.
#25 Nov 04 2010 at 11:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
551 posts
Aurelius wrote:

Whether SE files suit or not has absolutely no bearing on whether or not this was them willfully trying to deceive their customers. And what you do with someone after the fact doesn't change the fact that you have no legal entitlement to force an employee, subcontractor, or consultant to do anything. They can refuse anything they want to refuse and experience consequences for it, but that still doesn't mean you can make them do the job. Example, if you will:

I hire Bob's Painting Company as a subcontractor to paint a suite I'm renovating. I pay them a percentage of their quoted fee up front. They turn around and say they're not going to do the job for whatever reason. Can I force them to do the job? No. Can I force them through the courts to repay what I gave them? Yes. But does that mean I've forced them to do the job? No. And does it make me a liar for telling my client that the suite would be painted by such-and-such time because the plans I made to have it done fell through? No.

If you don't like the "ego", don't make stupid comments.


First, it has a direct bearing. If they don't fire them at the very least then that shows it was not a marketing screwup but SE condoned actions. Because if it was condoned, SE cannot take action against them or they will get sued themselves.

Second, you keep using the wrong analogy. Sure, you can't force an employee to do something, but you can get rid of them if they don't and replace them with someone who will. However, this is not a case of an employee not showing up for work or refusing to do work. This is a case of an employee doing their job in a shady way, in which case the only thing that matters is whether they do it with or without the employers consent. And if SE doesn't make it publicly known that it was not done with their consent, and instead decide to try to ignore it/bury it, then that is all the answer anyone needs.

If you really do own a business, I hope it's not in business/ contract law, or I feel sorry for your customers.

The only one making "stupid" comments is yourself, dude. Continue and make yourself look even dumber, or stop while you're ahead. Your choice.

Edit: and this is where I stop conversing with you, as I don't feel like being banned for what I will inevitably end up saying to you.

Edited, Nov 5th 2010 1:56am by Zorvan
____________________________



#26 Nov 04 2010 at 11:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
676 posts
FFXIV Blog wrote:
But when Square Enix released the "History/Achievement" feature on Lodestone a couple of days ago, they accidentally dropped the balls, and revealed that 2/7 of those celebrities wern't really doing their homework, so Square Enix was just writing Blogs of adventures that these celebrities didn't even go through, and yea was caught by Japanese players
I think this should speak for itself, but if it doesn't, allow me to explain.

If the bloggers themselves were not running these quests or these adventures then how do they know so much about them? Enough to write an entire article, I think not. This suggests one of several things. Either that SE themselves supplied the information to the writers (effectively telling them what to write) or they wrote the blogs under the celebrity's name. The alternative is that the celebrities would rather research all of this just to make false posts. Not entirely unlikely, but again I'd say the facts lean towards a bit of skulduggery on SE's part.

Even if it isn't directly to do with SE, its clear they did not check the validity of their posts. Remember, these are people being PAID to play, thus under SE's employ. A rather unfortunate and unexpected move from the software giant in my humble opinion.

Edit: And really, can we all be mature enough not to fight each other over this? Flame wars are so last decade.

Edited, Nov 5th 2010 1:55am by Glitterhands
____________________________

FFXI: Siren Server: Seiowan Lvl 99 WHM, SCH, BLM
FFXIV: Ragnarok Server: Lemuria Glitterhands All Classes 50
#27 Nov 04 2010 at 11:54 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
Zorvan wrote:
First, it has a direct bearing. If they don't fire them at the very least then that shows it was not a marketing screwup but SE condoned actions.


No it doesn't. It doesn't show that at all. If they kept blogging without actually playing the game it would show that SE either did nothing or that whatever they tried to do to rectify the situation didn't work, but according to the article at least one of the false bloggers has actually started playing.

Quote:
Second, you keep using the wrong analogy. Sure, you can't force an employee to do something, but you can get rid of them if they don't and replace them with someone who will. However, this is not a case of an employee not showing up for work or refusing to do work. This is a case of an employee doing their job in a shady way, in which case the only thing that matters is whether they do it with or without the employers consent. And if SE doesn't make it publicly known that it was not done with their consent, and instead decide to try to ignore it/bury it, then that is all the answer anyone needs.


No, because you don't pass the buck like that. They're not a political entity. They have no legislative accountability mandates to live up to. They can choose to handle it quietly and you can choose to make all the assumptions you want, but assumptions are not proof.

Quote:
If you really do own a business, I hope it's not in business/ contract law, or I feel sorry for your customers.

The only one making "stupid" comments is yourself, dude. Continue and make yourself look even dumber, or stop while you're ahead. Your choice.


Who are you again?
#28 Nov 04 2010 at 11:58 PM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
Glitterhands wrote:
FFXIV Blog wrote:
But when Square Enix released the "History/Achievement" feature on Lodestone a couple of days ago, they accidentally dropped the balls, and revealed that 2/7 of those celebrities wern't really doing their homework, so Square Enix was just writing Blogs of adventures that these celebrities didn't even go through, and yea was caught by Japanese players
I think this should speak for itself, but if it doesn't, allow me to explain.

If the bloggers themselves were not running these quests or these adventures then how do they know so much about them? Enough to write an entire article, I think not. This suggests one of several things. Either that SE themselves supplied the information to the writers (effectively telling them what to write) or they wrote the blogs under the celebrity's name. The alternative is that the celebrities would rather research all of this just to make false posts. Not entirely unlikely, but again I'd say the facts lean towards a bit of skulduggery on SE's part.


Are you forgetting that there was a beta period where these people could have played and learned about the game and that whatever they did in the beta would not be reflected in their Lodestone profiles?

Despite what some numpties here might want to think, I'm not leveraging an opinion either way. I'm just saying that these cynical assumptions that SE was behind the deception are just that...cynical assumptions.

Quote:
Even if it isn't directly to do with SE, its clear they did not check the validity of their posts. Remember, these are people being PAID to play, thus under SE's employ. A rather unfortunate and unexpected move from the software giant in my humble opinion.


**** happens. The larger the company, the harder it is to keep tabs on everything and everyone. Not saying it's okay, just saying that the more you guys leap to conclusions about SE, the harder it's going to be to form objective opinions on anything they do later.
#29 Nov 05 2010 at 12:25 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
sh*t happens. The larger the company, the harder it is to keep tabs on everything and everyone. Not saying it's okay, just saying that the more you guys leap to conclusions about SE, the harder it's going to be to form objective opinions on anything they do later.


We're not "jumping" to anything here. Our "good guess" is based on how SE has behaved during those past 5-7 years.
And btw: Whenever a sub-contractor of a major company f*cks up, it is only natural to blame the major company and not the sub-contractor (in this case: the celebs). It's the "parent" company's responsibility to choose their sub-contractors well. It's with the parent company that I have my contract, not with the sub-contractors. That's why it's called "sub-".

If you ignore this simple rule, any major company could always say: "It wasn't us, it was sub-contractor ABC's fault."
#30 Nov 05 2010 at 12:36 AM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
Rinsui wrote:

We're not "jumping" to anything here. Our "good guess" is based on how SE has behaved during those past 5-7 years.
And btw: Whenever a sub-contractor of a major company f*cks up, it is only natural to blame the major company and not the sub-contractor (in this case: the celebs). It's the "parent" company's responsibility to choose their sub-contractors well. It's with the parent company that I have my contract, not with the sub-contractors. That's why it's called "sub-".


And the point...once again...is that none of that would indicate, by default, that there was any dishonesty involved.

Quote:
If you ignore this simple rule, any major company could always say: "It wasn't us, it was sub-contractor ABC's fault."


Such a simple point so readily convoluted.

I'm not interested in your "good guess". I'm interested in proof before I label someone as dishonest or deceitful and around here, people don't need proof. SE says something and someone isn't satisfied that they lived up to their statements and it's immediately a case of SE having lied. Not that they fell short, not that they dropped the ball, but that they lied. That they were willfully misleading.

And yes, others here have made statements to the effect that SE was being deceitful. Deceitful means willfully misleading. It means knowingly presenting information that is contrary to reality. The bloggers were deceitful. We have no proof that SE was.

Again, it's called objectivity. 9 year olds call people who disappoint them liars because they're disappointed. Adults are expected to be able to tell the difference between a lie and a mistake. That's just how life goes.

Calling someone a liar is not very nice at all. Calling them out for their mistakes might hurt their feelings but as soon as you escalate it to accusations of dishonesty, a line has been crossed. That's why we have laws defending your right to speak your mind to someone but we have laws designed to prevent you from making false statements about their character. Words like "slander" come to mind, and if you were influential enough to actually cause harm based on your false accusations we get into words like "libel" and you don't want to be in a court room defending yourself against either of those. Not saying anyone here has crossed that line, just illustrating how uncool it is to so readily jump to such serious allegations.
#31 Nov 05 2010 at 12:44 AM Rating: Good
Thief's Knife
*****
15,053 posts
FFXIV is so bad that SE can't even play people to play it.
____________________________
Final Fantasy XI 12-14-11 Update wrote:
Adjust the resolution of menus.
The main screen resolution for "FINAL FANTASY XI" is dependent on the "Overlay Graphics Resolution" setting.
If the Overlay Graphics Resolution is set higher than the Menu Resolution, menus will be automatically resized.


I thought of it first:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=130073657654872218#20
#32 Nov 05 2010 at 12:49 AM Rating: Excellent
**
409 posts
Aurelius wrote:

Again, it's called objectivity. 9 year olds call people who disappoint them liars because they're disappointed. Adults are expected to be able to tell the difference between a lie and a mistake. That's just how life goes.



Objectivity is not assuming innocence until guilt is proven. That's at best hopeful naivete and at worst willful ignorance.

Objectivity is giving SE time to rectify the issues with said advertisers, or at least to admit there is an issue. Until I see SE do one or the other I'm not going to assume anything except that there was clearly something shady going on. Whether it was on the part of the advertisers who just wanted to make money, or SE who just wanted to draw more players to the game (to make more money) I can't say.

Then again given SE's track record with transparency, I'm not surprised that people are making the assumptions they are based on previous experiences nor will I fault people for making them.
____________________________
Q: How many SE employees does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, it's working as intended.
#33 Nov 05 2010 at 12:53 AM Rating: Default
*****
11,576 posts
SickleSageKiroh wrote:
Aurelius wrote:

Again, it's called objectivity. 9 year olds call people who disappoint them liars because they're disappointed. Adults are expected to be able to tell the difference between a lie and a mistake. That's just how life goes.



Objectivity is not assuming innocence until guilt is proven. That's at best hopeful naivete and at worst willful ignorance.

Objectivity is giving SE time to rectify the issues with said advertisers, or at least to admit there is an issue. Until I see SE do one or the other I'm not going to assume anything except that there was clearly something shady going on. Whether it was on the part of the advertisers who just wanted to make money, or SE who just wanted to draw more players to the game (to make more money) I can't say.

Then again given SE's track record with transparency, I'm not surprised that people are making the assumptions they are based on previous experiences nor will I fault people for making them.


I guess I must still be one of the few people who are willing to accept cultural differences in the way SE handles things compared to how we might expect them to be handled in North America. Carry on then. The cynics are creating their own misery. Frankly, I could care less. Short of a reliable news source specifically stating that SE only paid to use the names and photos of the celebrities and was producing the blog articles themselves, I see no reason to be unhappy over any of this.

The lynch mob is hungry for blood and they'll take it any way they can get it. For shame.
#34 Nov 05 2010 at 1:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
@Aurelius
Your standpoint is either very honorable, or just plain naive - depends on whether you share it or not, I guess.
There's quite a lot of things that can not (without an unreasunable amount of resources spent) be objectively "proven".
Generally, in such cases, the party with more funds do uncover/hide the truth wins. Just saying that you will not form a judgement (and trying to prevent people to do so) before the one or the other possibility is proven is nice, but will ultimately lead to a lot of offenses going unpunished. With multiple parties involved, determining who exactly is responsible for what exactly can become very hairy very fast. That's why lawsuits against major parties tend to be drawn out over several months/years.

Luckily, though, public opinion is not subject to official laws, and often (falsely) formed on the spot. And while it is good that legal punishment is bound to laws, I believe a "witchhunt mentality" in cases where both the stakes and the chances for discovering the "ultimate truth" are lower is right the counter-balance needed for a good system of customer responsibility/trust. If a major company, with millions and billions invested in their PR department fails to prove their "innocence" to a mob of angry customers, well, I say: burn them. I'll gladly light the match. They already have more than a fair share of power to sway the public opinion (just to mention it: there's still no "official" reviews of FFXIV here in Japan...); if they still f*ck up, my "naive" guess is they deserve the backlash.

In a way, the "objectivity" you herald heavily plays into the hands of whoever controls the flow of "legally sanctioned, objectively provable" information. Which generally is not the person on the receiving end of a bad deal.
#35 Nov 05 2010 at 1:56 AM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
Rinsui wrote:
@Aurelius
Your standpoint is either very honorable, or just plain naive - depends on whether you share it or not, I guess.
There's quite a lot of things that can not (without an unreasunable amount of resources spent) be objectively "proven".
Generally, in such cases, the party with more funds do uncover/hide the truth wins. Just saying that you will not form a judgement (and trying to prevent people to do so) before the one or the other possibility is proven is nice, but will ultimately lead to a lot of offenses going unpunished. With multiple parties involved, determining who exactly is responsible for what exactly can become very hairy very fast. That's why lawsuits against major parties tend to be drawn out over several months/years.

Luckily, though, public opinion is not subject to official laws, and often (falsely) formed on the spot. And while it is good that legal punishment is bound to laws, I believe a "witchhunt mentality" in cases where both the stakes and the chances for discovering the "ultimate truth" are lower is right the counter-balance needed for a good system of customer responsibility/trust. If a major company, with millions and billions invested in their PR department fails to prove their "innocence" to a mob of angry customers, well, I say: burn them. I'll gladly light the match. They already have more than a fair share of power to sway the public opinion (just to mention it: there's still no "official" reviews of FFXIV here in Japan...); if they still f*ck up, my "naive" guess is they deserve the backlash.

In a way, the "objectivity" you herald heavily plays into the hands of whoever controls the flow of "legally sanctioned, objectively provable" information. Which generally is not the person on the receiving end of a bad deal.


I think that at the heart of the issue is that I'm still willing to give SE the benefit of the doubt. I've been one of SE's most vocal critics since ZAM opened the XIV forums. I haven't been shy about my critiques of the game through OB and into CE service. And my account is deactivated and has been for a couple of weeks. So anyone who wants to accuse me of fanboism for taking the opposite side of the anti-SE crusade is more than welcome to stick their foot in their mouth if they're so inclined. I just think there's a fine line between being disappointed by certain aspects of a video game and leveling such a massive amount of adolescent rage at a company.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything beyond the fact that they're so wound up over this that rational thought has long since left the building. These are the same people who trash WoW for the angst-riddled net-kiddie behavior, yet here they are doing the exact same **** thing. Grown ups don't act this way. It's shameful behavior. It's a ******* video game for Christ's sake, not global foreign policy. If your experience leads you to a certain point of view that has you read and willing to believe SE supports and condones this micro-fiasco then more power to you. But my hope (a naive one, at that) would be that people have the mental acuity to recognize the difference between a knee-jerk response and a rational one, because this forum is full of knees and full of jerks and they're both just flying all over the **** place.
#36 Nov 05 2010 at 2:01 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
@Aurelius
A standpoint I can perfectly well live with.
Cheers. ^.^/


Edited, Nov 5th 2010 4:03am by Rinsui
#37 Nov 05 2010 at 2:50 AM Rating: Good
**
409 posts
@ Aur

I find myself in the rather pleasant position of agreeing with your last post. There's nothing wrong with being rational and keeping things in proportion.

Rate up.
____________________________
Q: How many SE employees does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: None, it's working as intended.
#38 Nov 05 2010 at 3:44 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,408 posts
What's that, people pretending they have done things in a MMO?
WOW!! SHOCKER!!


Nope, total sarcasm on that part. It's why I actually enjoyed the Rare/Ex factor on FFXI. It proved you didnt purchase the item or the gils.

I am not too fussed about the blogs but either way why make crap up about stuff you didnt do? are people seriously that fake?.
____________________________


If my velocity starts to make you sweat, then just don't
let go
#39 Nov 05 2010 at 4:01 AM Rating: Decent
25 posts
This thread reminds me of 12 Angry Men...lol
#40 Nov 05 2010 at 4:18 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Quote:
What's that, people pretending they have done things in a MMO?
WOW!! SHOCKER!!


To me this screams more as someone that started out liking the game or was paid to do so and went into this thing full guns blazing then hated the game so much they didn't want to play it anymore but felt they had to keep writing so just made stuff up from others experiences. In all honesty thats far more damanging than the fact it might of just been a marketing stunt.

Quote:
And my account is deactivated and has been for a couple of weeks


I find it really funny that the games most vocal defenders don't play the game anymore either, along with its most hated critics. Seems both its haters and defenders can't stop arguing over it but both agree it's not worth logging into at least.

Edited, Nov 5th 2010 6:25am by preludes
____________________________
BANNED
#41 Nov 05 2010 at 4:35 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,218 posts
Aurelius wrote:
digitalcraft, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Having people in a commercial about a game is completely different than false blogs being payed for by the company to make it look like people are in the game. It takes some real suspension of reality to try to equivocate these two things. Aurelius, you more than anyone needs to take a step back, because you blindly and rudely attack constantly to defend SE. You're going to come back sometime and look at your posts and be ashamed.


Oh, smarten up. The point I've been making is that people are saying SE was being deceitful because the blogs were falsified. Nobody has any proof at all that SE wrote the blogs. Is it so far fetched to give SE the benefit of the doubt that they paid these people thinking that because they were being paid they'd actually do what they were asked to do and play the game and blog about it instead of making false entries? Blame the people who wrote the blogs until you've got proof otherwise. It's called objectivity.


Do you actually think those celebrities wrote those blogs, or do you think their names were attached with their (paid) permission?

I think you can clearly blame both parties. An endorser does have a responsibility not to lie or let themselves be used as an instrument to lie, and the company that's advertising has a responsibility to keep their message truthful. Even if these endorsers actually wrote their own blogs (some thing I doubt in most cases) they're still doing it on S-Es dime to promote S-e's product, so S-E is responsible for vetting what they write as being at least mostly truthful.

My opinion, based on years of watching how marketing types operate, is that S-E told their endorsers what portions of the game experience they wanted them to highlight, and unless the celeb insisted on doing it themselves, probably wrote the blogs in question and then attached the celebrity names to them (with paid permission, of course).

In no way do I actually feel that this makes S-E worse than say... every single large corporation on earth. This is just par for the course. Virtually nothing you see in an advertisement these days is any thing other than an attempt to emotionally manipulate you.
#42 Nov 05 2010 at 3:53 PM Rating: Decent
3 posts
So few have though of the possibility that SE hired these people to write professional level journals about their adventures (for advertisement purposes) but they just made stuff up to get it done faster and get paid.
#43 Nov 05 2010 at 9:48 PM Rating: Good
**
305 posts
KarlHungis wrote:

In no way do I actually feel that this makes S-E worse than say... every single large corporation on earth. This is just par for the course. Virtually nothing you see in an advertisement these days is any thing other than an attempt to emotionally manipulate you.



I agree, it doesn't raise or lower my opinion of SE... just a pretty funny tidbit of tabloid-ish stuff to laugh about.
____________________________


This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 15 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (15)