Why the Skyrim boycott is a waste of time and missing enjoyment.

[octafish]

There is a boycott? Cool. You can count me in on that. I'm also boycotting MW3, Arkham Asylum 2, any Assassin's Creed games on the horizon, a Dead Space Sequel if they make it and any other number of games that don't interest me. Now if I am wrong and Bethesda have somehow found a way to write interesting stories, characters and locations, then I may abandon my "games that don't interest me in the slightest" boycott.

I'm not interested in Scrolls either, but I've never been into those type of card games.

 

[Epona]

Let them boycott if they want. If they feel it's a legitimate reason, there's no point in stopping them.

Boycotting boycotts gets us nowhere.

Exactly and it shows that gamers do have limits. That we aren't just druggies who will do/ignore anything for our next fix. That's what some gamers sound like to me, "I don't care about anything but getting my hands on ".

honestly, that's pretty much me. why should i care? i'm a consumer. i want quality product. i'm not a druggie. i'm just someone who at the end of the day wants the game that appeals to me most.

if minecraft doesn't survive this legal battle (i really don't understand how, it's no longer some little game- it's generated millions of dollars) it's simply natural selection in my eyes. if it survives (which it obviously will, i mean c'mon) well... then everything's back to normal then, isn't it?

the boycott can only hurt, and that's why i don't see the point of it.

That's the point of a boycott, to hurt sales, how can you miss the point of a boycott?

no. boycotts are to accomplish something good. in 1955 people boycotted buses in order to put an end to racial segregation. whats this for? to show bethesda that a small portion of their fanbase gets pissy whenever they do something the fanbase deems incorrect? what does this accomplish other than hurting people who put four years into making an awesome game?

it just comes off as childish to me. i dunno.

Oh, so your opinion is that boycotts should never be used for anything smaller than stopping racial segregation? Whatever.

Boycotts are a consumer tool to affect change and they do so by hurting sales of a product or a series of products.

 

[SevenForce]

Boycotting a game is pointless

At some point you will give in and buy the game.

Bethesda aren't bad people, their legal team are just being assholes who won't do the Quake 3 match.

Why should they though? They have a legitimate concern with the name of notches game, why should they behave like 12 year olds and play a game over it?

Oh, god forbid people play video games like 12 year olds.

Nice fox news move.

No, I'm not saying 12 year olds are the only ones acceptable to play games.

I'm saying only immature people use video games to solve complex legal debates.

Nice try though.

Apparently you want me to debate as though I'm not 12 so I guess I'll give that a shot. My opinion is (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) that the quake III thing was just an attempt at mocking how immature the lawsuit is in the first place. Fighting fire with fire. Or so they thought.

 

[Epona]

Duplicate post because the servers are screwed up.

 

[Cryptotom]

I feel I should point out that Notch himself said on Twitter that he's still getting Skyrim and is really looking forward to it.

 

[JimmyC99]

I don't claim to be an expert but doesn't US Copyright law work like this, you have to protect your copyright, against ANY infractions. and considering Mojang tried to TM the word "Scrolls", they have every right, Zenimax has said NOTHING in the press about this, where as Notch has.

 

[Epona]

I feel I sould point out that Notch himself said on Twitter that he's still getting Skyrim and is really looking forward to it.

Just because people think Bethesda is doing wrong by Mojang, doesn't mean that they want Notch to think for them.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

-Snip-

Upon reading this thread i can now guarantee what you wrote was a general waste of my time since your view was not an unbiased one.

Please don't go around telling people what to do it just makes you look stupid and whiny not to mention fanboyish.

And it also won't hurt the sales figures at all if you paid attention to previous sales.

 

[cthulhumythos]

Let them boycott if they want. If they feel it's a legitimate reason, there's no point in stopping them.

Boycotting boycotts gets us nowhere.

Exactly and it shows that gamers do have limits. That we aren't just druggies who will do/ignore anything for our next fix. That's what some gamers sound like to me, "I don't care about anything but getting my hands on ".

honestly, that's pretty much me. why should i care? i'm a consumer. i want quality product. i'm not a druggie. i'm just someone who at the end of the day wants the game that appeals to me most.

if minecraft doesn't survive this legal battle (i really don't understand how, it's no longer some little game- it's generated millions of dollars) it's simply natural selection in my eyes. if it survives (which it obviously will, i mean c'mon) well... then everything's back to normal then, isn't it?

the boycott can only hurt, and that's why i don't see the point of it.

That's the point of a boycott, to hurt sales, how can you miss the point of a boycott?

no. boycotts are to accomplish something good. in 1955 people boycotted buses in order to put an end to racial segregation. whats this for? to show bethesda that a small portion of their fanbase gets pissy whenever they do something the fanbase deems incorrect? what does this accomplish other than hurting people who put four years into making an awesome game?

it just comes off as childish to me. i dunno.

Oh, so your opinion is that boycotts should never be used for anything smaller than stopping racial segregation? Whatever.

Boycotts are a consumer tool to affect change and they do so by hurting sales of a product or a series of products.

i used racial segregation as an example.

we've explained that we want to hurt sales- why?

'cause we're mad? what does this change? nothing.

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

I don't claim to be an expert but doesn't US Copyright law work like this, you have to protect your copyright, against ANY infractions. and considering Mojang tried to TM the word "Scrolls", they have every right, Zenimax has said NOTHING in the press about this, where as Notch has.

From what I understand yes, more or less anything that "might" be considered legal infringement must be acted on or the copyright holder is signed as letting the copyright lapse.

 

[Epona]

Boycotting a game is pointless

At some point you will give in and buy the game.

Bethesda aren't bad people, their legal team are just being assholes who won't do the Quake 3 match.

The reason online passes and everything else bad about the industry exists and is here to stay, gamers who "just support the devs" or say "boycotts never work so I'll get it anyway" are killing this industry by showing EA and their ilk they can get away with literally anything.

Exactly, when a few gamers get a spine and decide to boycott a game over what THEY perceive as a huge company picking on a small company threads like this pop up trying to discourage a boycott.

Good luck doing that when you can't get people to boycott companies that do much worse things.

I know right, I am not even a Skyrim boycotter but I do appreciate that gamers are finally standing up for something.

Exactly. This is a minor reason to boycott, if someone wants to over it I'm not going to flame them over it. However there are some big issues in the current gaming industry that should result in the publisher being told to knock it off via a boycott, but no one ever does and thus publishers can do ANYTHING.

Exactly, once gamers start standing up for themselves, they will start looking harder at other boycott-worthy actions like online passes and always on DRM. Baby steps.

 

[Epona]

Let them boycott if they want. If they feel it's a legitimate reason, there's no point in stopping them.

Boycotting boycotts gets us nowhere.

Exactly and it shows that gamers do have limits. That we aren't just druggies who will do/ignore anything for our next fix. That's what some gamers sound like to me, "I don't care about anything but getting my hands on ".

honestly, that's pretty much me. why should i care? i'm a consumer. i want quality product. i'm not a druggie. i'm just someone who at the end of the day wants the game that appeals to me most.

if minecraft doesn't survive this legal battle (i really don't understand how, it's no longer some little game- it's generated millions of dollars) it's simply natural selection in my eyes. if it survives (which it obviously will, i mean c'mon) well... then everything's back to normal then, isn't it?

the boycott can only hurt, and that's why i don't see the point of it.

That's the point of a boycott, to hurt sales, how can you miss the point of a boycott?

no. boycotts are to accomplish something good. in 1955 people boycotted buses in order to put an end to racial segregation. whats this for? to show bethesda that a small portion of their fanbase gets pissy whenever they do something the fanbase deems incorrect? what does this accomplish other than hurting people who put four years into making an awesome game?

it just comes off as childish to me. i dunno.

Oh, so your opinion is that boycotts should never be used for anything smaller than stopping racial segregation? Whatever.

Boycotts are a consumer tool to affect change and they do so by hurting sales of a product or a series of products.

i used racial segregation as an example.

we've explained that we want to hurt sales- why?

'cause we're mad? what does this change? nothing.

It's the consumers way of telling a company they don't approve of something. You can say "I don't approve of this Bethesda" but if you go out and buy Skyrim they won't care. It only matters when you speak with your wallet (ie, boycott).

 

[Saviordd1]

Upon reading this thread i can now guarantee what you wrote was a general waste of my time since your view was not an unbiased one.

Please don't go around telling people what to do it just makes you look stupid and whiny not to mention fanboyish.

And it also won't hurt the sales figures at all if you paid attention to previous sales.

If you feel it a waste then I apologize.

I'm not telling people what to do, though I could see why you would think that, I just wish people would actually think more you know?

 

[Normandyfoxtrot]

Let them boycott if they want. If they feel it's a legitimate reason, there's no point in stopping them.

Boycotting boycotts gets us nowhere.

Exactly and it shows that gamers do have limits. That we aren't just druggies who will do/ignore anything for our next fix. That's what some gamers sound like to me, "I don't care about anything but getting my hands on ".

honestly, that's pretty much me. why should i care? i'm a consumer. i want quality product. i'm not a druggie. i'm just someone who at the end of the day wants the game that appeals to me most.

if minecraft doesn't survive this legal battle (i really don't understand how, it's no longer some little game- it's generated millions of dollars) it's simply natural selection in my eyes. if it survives (which it obviously will, i mean c'mon) well... then everything's back to normal then, isn't it?

the boycott can only hurt, and that's why i don't see the point of it.

That's the point of a boycott, to hurt sales, how can you miss the point of a boycott?

no. boycotts are to accomplish something good. in 1955 people boycotted buses in order to put an end to racial segregation. whats this for? to show bethesda that a small portion of their fanbase gets pissy whenever they do something the fanbase deems incorrect? what does this accomplish other than hurting people who put four years into making an awesome game?

it just comes off as childish to me. i dunno.

Oh, so your opinion is that boycotts should never be used for anything smaller than stopping racial segregation? Whatever.

Boycotts are a consumer tool to affect change and they do so by hurting sales of a product or a series of products.

i used racial segregation as an example.

we've explained that we want to hurt sales- why?

'cause we're mad? what does this change? nothing.

It's the consumers way of telling a company they don't approve of something. You can say "I don't approve of this Bethesda" but if you go out and buy Skyrim they won't care. It only matters when you speak with your wallet (ie, boycott).

Um, your boycotting zenimax technically in fact I don't think I've seen many gamer boycotts against actually developers.

 

[AstylahAthrys]

Thank you! But I don't think this boycott means shit. Gamers are terrible at Boycotts. Remember Left 4 Dead 2? Or Modern Warfare 2. Those were epic fails.

 

[Epona]

Upon reading this thread i can now guarantee what you wrote was a general waste of my time since your view was not an unbiased one.

Please don't go around telling people what to do it just makes you look stupid and whiny not to mention fanboyish.

And it also won't hurt the sales figures at all if you paid attention to previous sales.

If you feel it a waste then I apologize.

I'm not telling people what to do, though I could see why you would think that, I just wish people would actually think more you know?

Gamers are finally beginning to stand up for something and you're trying to discourage it. If anything, you are telling people to stop thinking for themselves.

The difference between someone saying they are going to boycott Skyrim and someone saying "Don't do it, it's just a waste of time" is that the first person isn't trying to get anyone else to do something while the second person is.

 

[Epona]

Let them boycott if they want. If they feel it's a legitimate reason, there's no point in stopping them.

Boycotting boycotts gets us nowhere.

Exactly and it shows that gamers do have limits. That we aren't just druggies who will do/ignore anything for our next fix. That's what some gamers sound like to me, "I don't care about anything but getting my hands on ".

honestly, that's pretty much me. why should i care? i'm a consumer. i want quality product. i'm not a druggie. i'm just someone who at the end of the day wants the game that appeals to me most.

if minecraft doesn't survive this legal battle (i really don't understand how, it's no longer some little game- it's generated millions of dollars) it's simply natural selection in my eyes. if it survives (which it obviously will, i mean c'mon) well... then everything's back to normal then, isn't it?

the boycott can only hurt, and that's why i don't see the point of it.

That's the point of a boycott, to hurt sales, how can you miss the point of a boycott?

no. boycotts are to accomplish something good. in 1955 people boycotted buses in order to put an end to racial segregation. whats this for? to show bethesda that a small portion of their fanbase gets pissy whenever they do something the fanbase deems incorrect? what does this accomplish other than hurting people who put four years into making an awesome game?

it just comes off as childish to me. i dunno.

Oh, so your opinion is that boycotts should never be used for anything smaller than stopping racial segregation? Whatever.

Boycotts are a consumer tool to affect change and they do so by hurting sales of a product or a series of products.

i used racial segregation as an example.

we've explained that we want to hurt sales- why?

'cause we're mad? what does this change? nothing.

It's the consumers way of telling a company they don't approve of something. You can say "I don't approve of this Bethesda" but if you go out and buy Skyrim they won't care. It only matters when you speak with your wallet (ie, boycott).

Um, your boycotting zenimax technically in fact I don't think I've seen many gamer boycotts against actually developers.

Um, Zenimax owns Bethesda.

If you boycotted Wal Mart, would you be ok with people saying "what about those poor clerks that you aren't giving money to"?

 

[Torrasque]

My problem with these fanboys boycotting Skyrim, is that they are buttmad about something the legal departments are doing... and nothing to do with the actual game itself.
Technically speaking, they have no problem with Bethesda, no problem with Skyrim, and no problem with the developers.
They have a problem with the legal boys who are doing what they are paid to do.
Do I think the court case is stupid? Of course I do.
Do I think they are doing their job like they should be? Fucking rights, in the mind of a lawyer, this case is really important.
Is boycotting Skyrim going to do anything? If its just the Minecraft crowd, then no. The game will still sell super well.

So go ahead, boycott Skyrim.
No one that matters really gives a damn.

 

[Saviordd1]

Upon reading this thread i can now guarantee what you wrote was a general waste of my time since your view was not an unbiased one.

Please don't go around telling people what to do it just makes you look stupid and whiny not to mention fanboyish.

And it also won't hurt the sales figures at all if you paid attention to previous sales.

If you feel it a waste then I apologize.

I'm not telling people what to do, though I could see why you would think that, I just wish people would actually think more you know?

Gamers are finally beginning to stand up for something and you're trying to discourage it. If anything, you are telling people to stop thinking for themselves.

The difference between someone saying they are going to boycott Skyrim and someone saying "Don't do it, it's just a waste of time" is that the first person isn't trying to get anyone else to do something while the second person is.

Fine you know what, I just had a mood lifting moment thanks to another thread so I'm not gonna keep arguing to badly.

They can boycott, I just hope they can read both sides and truly decide for themselves.