Is it ethically right to play SwTOR?

[ImmortalLowlife]

OP....If you really think about it, if you look at it that way then we're ALL being exploited in some way,shape,form,or fashion. Unless you grow and raise your own food, the grocery stores prices determine what you eat. If they decided to raise the price of beef, then you'll either pay what they ask or stop eating beef. If you pay rent, then whoever you're renting from controls a part of your life. If they decide to raise your rent then they can & you can either pay it or move out. That's the nature of businesses. They all operate on the principals of "supply & demand". But as long as YOU aren't being forced to do something (like make purchases on the CM) then it can't be considered unethical imo.

[TravelersWay]

because ethics are important to me, and if someone is exploiting others I would do something about it. I don't want to continue playing a game if doing so is contributing to some greedy money grabbing company that will use it's assets to rob people and have them even thank them.

 

There is a difference between someone voluntarily spending money on a piece of virtual goods in a game they can afford, and some vagrant on the street who sticks a gun in your face and forces you to hand over all your material possessions.

 

There is a difference between a company running a game that is pure entertainment and not necessary for survival, and a business that suddenly jacks up the price of food and water in the immediate aftermath of a natural disaster.

 

Bioware setting the price of highly desirable CM items is no different than Dodge setting the price of the Viper SRT and that being significantly different than the Dart SE.

 

Only you can be the sole judge of what is ethical to you. Do I agree with some of EA's business practices? No, and I will vote for them again this year for Worst Company in America, even though in the grand sceme of things, other companies have done much worse. I will also not stop buying and playing games that they publish - like SWTOR and Dragon Age (though I will not buy any SimCity games until we get a worthy successor to the franchise), because those transgressions do not bother me enough to pass up on games that I thoroughly enjoy. However, I will not buy another SOE game due to how they are handling the shutdown of four of their current MMOs.

Edited March 21, 2014 by TravelersWay

[PlasmaJohn]

But if you want to talk about ethics in playing swtor then there are some f2p restrictions that really bother me, i mentioned them in other threads too :

1. paying for quickbar

2. paying to accept quest items

3. paying for hide/show helmet option

3. paying for show/hide title and/or legacy name option

1,3 and 4 can be unlocked for a one-time cost and can be found for a reasonable amount of IG currency. If you spend the $5 to get to Preferred status you automatically get 4 bars which is "good enough".

 

There's no unlock for 2 and I'd agree with you except those boxes tend to contain vendor trash (stuff that won't sell on the GTN).

 

Now if you're looking for a cause, the monetized med-probes is pretty slimy IMO.

[DarthTHC]

I have no problem with CM prices, not at all. i don't like gambling packs at all, that is why i will never buy them but if someone wants to then that doesn't bother me and that should not bother me no matter how dishonest this gambling pack business seems to me. And also Bioware is not the 1st publisher/developer group to manipulate their own game's economy and frankly i don't see anything wrong with it, it is better than the gold seller controlling economy like other f2p mmorpg out in market.

But if you want to talk about ethics in playing swtor then there are some f2p restrictions that really bother me, i mentioned them in other threads too :

1. paying for quickbar

2. paying to accept quest items

3. paying for hide/show helmet option

3. paying for show/hide title and/or legacy name option

 

These are the things that ethically bothers me, these are simple UI options which are standard in mmorpg, even browser based mmorpg these days come out with 6-10 quickbar; a lot of achievement title and not to mention lots of head slot items and they never monetize these simple UI options. monetizing these options is just plain nasty.

 

Why do those things ethically bother you?

 

People who aren't paying for the sub, the vast majority of them, choose not to pay for the sub. Almost anyone with a computer and internet connection capable of playing this game can find a way to come up with the subscription fee. They just don't want to. It's their choice.

 

So they're choosing to play with restrictions that they know exist when they make that choice.

 

For the very tiny minority who somehow has a computer and internet connection capable of playing this game but absolutely cannot manage to find an extra $15 per month, they're still choosing to play the game, without paying a dime, knowing full well the restrictions the game will place upon them.

 

So you have individual choice upon individual choice upon individual choice, all of which boil down to playing a game.

 

There is no lack of ethics or ethical dilemma anywhere within that whole stack of stuff. There are no victims. Nobody is being taken advantage of. Nobody is being harmed. Everyone is choosing to do exactly what they want and could at a moment's notice make a different choice.

Edited March 21, 2014 by DarthTHC

[ghoul_drool]

"It was not an accusation of any one person, but airing out a suscpision"

 

That IS an accusation. And it is very, very wrong and unethical to do it without any proof.

[Malastare]

Exploring this and getting to the bottom of this was the goal, maybe there is no bottom, but let's explore to find out, and i'm actually quite happy with discussion and the tone of it now, and found your response to the topic (not me) logical and well laid out.

 

I'm all for that, but if you want to explore something, you have to actually say what you're exploring. At the moment, I've only seen a vague collection of thoughts with no coherent statement. The exploration seems to have no destination or clear pathSo, what is your question?

 

Is it ethical to play a game? Sure... why wouldn't it be? If I have spare time and money to pay for it, then there is no ethical issue with the use of interactive entertainment.

 

Is it ethical to pay microtransactions? Again, why wouldn't it be? Microtransactions are just optional payments for entertainment. I see no difference between spending $5 on CC, $5 on some DLC for Rome II, or $5 on a video from Amazon. I see paying microtransactions as no less ethical than buying a cupcake while on vacation.

 

Is it ethical for a company to charge microtransactions? If I can't find an ethical problem with paying them, then I don't expect I'll find an ethical problem with a company accepting them. Again, its just paying for entertainment.

 

Is it ethical for Bioware to use microtransactions for random drops? At least this is worth thinking about. The quick answer is, again: Why wouldn't it be? The CM packs are labeled as being random. No reasonable person is under the impression that they are not, so there is no issue with improper descriptions. And there isn't anything particularly wrong with the randomness, either. It is a mechanism which has been used for centuries. It simultaneously increases profit for the "seller" and provides suspense for the "buyer". A randomized experience is one of the more popular ways of inducing "fun" into various forms of entertainment. Humans actually derive enjoyment from not knowing the outcome of events. Of course, with games, this sometimes comes into direct conflict with the tendency of humans to be selfish.

 

Is it ethical for Bioware to set item probabilities to induce rarity and greater demand? I see no reason why it wouldn't be. In fact, I see it as a required aspect of the game. Players actually like rarity. The desire to obtain a rare item is a source of motivation, and the success of getting that item is a strong form of entertainment. If all items were easy to obtain, or if they were merely equally rare, then people would be much less interested in them. This desired rarity, then, is what drives people to grind quests, or buy packs, or coins. However, it is a balancing act, as excessive rarity will actually drive down demand, if only due to a lack of supply.

 

What is left? This has all been addressed, but you still keep talking about "the question" and "the exploration" without actually identifying where this possibly non-ethical behavior is taking place. It seems as if "the question" is a moving target which dances away from any attempt to actually discuss it. You seem to be operating under the default assumption that the situation behind "the question" is unethical, but you aren't describing how or why or who is being hurt or mistreated, because you are just "asking the question".

 

And while it isn't necessarily on-topic, it is perhaps worth taking a moment to analyze what your intentions are with the thread. You seem to have suddenly decided to go on a crusade against unethical companies, and aimed your telescope at a game where people optionally --and generally happily-- pay for entertainment. Meanwhile, you're using a computer. It's more likely that people were actually exploited in the creation of your keyboard than by being overcharged by a video game. So why not consider boycotting keyboard makers? Or electronics companies who pay workers trivial wages to create items sold for a premium in other countries...

 

...so that people can sit in front of them and claim that it might be unethical that they paid $4 for a random digital thingy and didn't get the dewback they wanted.

[Macetheace]

"It was not an accusation of any one person, but airing out a suscpision"

 

That IS an accusation. And it is very, very wrong and unethical to do it without any proof.

no it isn't, not when you state that you wonder whether something is the case -it's not accusing, and it feels like accusing if it's a bad thing, and doesn't if it isn't - and if you read the two posts I wrote on that issue, you shouldn't reach that conclusion.

And while it isn't necessarily on-topic, it is perhaps worth taking a moment to analyze what your intentions are with the thread. You seem to have suddenly decided to go on a crusade against unethical companies, and aimed your telescope at a game where people optionally --and generally happily-- pay for entertainment. Meanwhile, you're using a computer. It's more likely that people were actually exploited in the creation of your keyboard than by being overcharged by a video game. So why not consider boycotting keyboard makers? Or electronics companies who pay workers trivial wages to create items sold for a premium in other countries...

 

...so that people can sit in front of them and claim that it might be unethical that they paid $4 for a random digital thingy and didn't get the dewback they wanted.

 

yes, taking a moment to analyze my intetions is worth it, something we seldom do enough of, and quite a wise thing to do I might add. Discussing the topic has caused me to do exactly that. Note that while hoped for, ore ven expected, it wasn't started with any agenda or motive than to try and determine whether what was going on was ethical.

 

it wasn't a hate campaign against companies, hate campaigns are not something i subscribe to, crusades are for a just cause, but like i've pointed out many many times, the intetion was not to crucify bioware but to determine whether what was going on was morally wrong and ethically compromising or bad.

 

People have many grieviances, and will enter topics like this with prejudice, it is not a surprise, and such topics bring such views to light, but there should be an environment people can talk about them anyway, to lead to better not to worse, it won't alwyas be pretty, as can clearly be seen, although the responders in this topic have used on the whole much gentler language than others have.

Edited March 21, 2014 by Macetheace

[Macetheace]

I'm not sure what the point is of the quoted part in the OP.

it framed why i was raising the case of ethics in the first place, it is reading that post from that guy, that caused me to start thinking about the whole issue, and seek the communiites point of views on it. It was important to provide the quote to show the context and purpose of the discussion, and vital to exploring it I felt.

 

Before reading that, I was okay about the CM really, but then I hadn't really thought about it deeply or seriously, if you go to the topic he wrote that response in, you would see what I had written prior to that, and he was responding to what I had said.

 

He made sense to me, and thus ofc the quesetion was raised, is it really right? and the rest of the topic followed.

Bioware determines the GTN value of an item? Well obviously. Rare things are more valuable. But why frame that as a conspiracy? "Oh, Bioware lines its pockets by keeping desirable items rare, which inflates the GTN, so people have to use the Cartel Market." You could just say "Bioware offers rare items through the Cartel Market, so people have to use the Cartel Market."

 

GTN inflation doesn't help Bioware get your money. In fact, if Bioware wanted to screw you for your cash through the GTN, they'd prevent Cartel Market items from being trade-able. That way you'd have to try to get everything you wanted through the Cartel Market yourself, instead of having the option to use in-game credits.

 

But if your point, OP, is just that Bioware intentionally makes some items rare so the population has to buy more packs to try and get them, then yes, obviously. I hope you're not just figuring that out.

tbh I hadn't really thought much about it, I assumed that was the case, kinda obvious, unless bioware say it isn't so, then the debate is on - they lying? or telling the truth? - what ofc became this topic was whether such practices are right ethically, including this one you have stated here, which is asked by this topic albeit indirectly.

[kimdante]

Something that is rare and well crafted will invariably always be valued higher. A well-designed, good-looking armor skin or mount should be released in limited amounts, this way whomever has the discipline and skill to make credits can enjoy it and, in their minds, stand out .

 

Is it ethically right for European Car Manufacturers to produce vehicles that cost 100K and up (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley)? Is it ethically right for fashion designers to charge two hundred dollars for a t-shirt or several thousand dollars for a suit? Is it ethically right for Apple to charge 2 K for a laptop which will be obsolete in two years (Planned obsolescence)?

 

Is it ethical for Bioware to set item probabilities to induce rarity and greater demand? I see no reason why it wouldn't be. In fact, I see it as a required aspect of the game. Players actually like rarity. The desire to obtain a rare item is a source of motivation, and the success of getting that item is a strong form of entertainment. If all items were easy to obtain, or if they were merely equally rare, then people would be much less interested in them. This desired rarity, then, is what drives people to grind quests, or buy packs, or coins. However, it is a balancing act, as excessive rarity will actually drive down demand, if only due to a lack of supply.

 

Edit: Malastare pretty much summed it up in his post (which I just read). /thread

Edited March 21, 2014 by kimdante

[Macetheace]

OP....If you really think about it, if you look at it that way then we're ALL being exploited in some way,shape,form,or fashion. Unless you grow and raise your own food, the grocery stores prices determine what you eat. If they decided to raise the price of beef, then you'll either pay what they ask or stop eating beef. If you pay rent, then whoever you're renting from controls a part of your life. If they decide to raise your rent then they can & you can either pay it or move out. That's the nature of businesses. They all operate on the principals of "supply & demand". But as long as YOU aren't being forced to do something (like make purchases on the CM) then it can't be considered unethical imo.

thank you, makes sense, it's a weights and measures thing isn't it. it depends on how much the price is, how oppressive or extensive it is, it depends then on the circumstance of the involved individuals and groups, it also depends on the perceived value and also manipulating perception to increase value intentionally to line your pockets which is basically stealing from people in a cleverer way.

 

but then it was never the case of whether trading was ethically wrong - so maybe we can safely say having a cartel market available isn't ethically wrong for the purpose it serves - but you must hten explore purpose. and as I mentioned earlier somewhere you have an obligation to do so, both for yourself and for others., - what you find out for your situation will not be the same for everyone elses though but those in similar position /circumstance to you can find some wisdom and guidance in determining juris prudence, right or wrong and whether it is sin or not - which direclty affects you.

Something that is rare and well crafted will invariably always be valued higher. A well-designed, good-looking armor skin or mount should be released in limited amounts, this way whomever has the discipline and skill to make credits can enjoy it and, in their minds, stand out .

 

Is it ethically right for European Car Manufacturers to produce vehicles that cost 100K and up (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bentley)? Is it ethically right for fashion designers to charge two hundred dollars for a t-shirt or several thousand dollars for a suit? Is it ethically right for Apple to charge 2 K for a laptop which will be obsolete in two years (Planned obsolescence)?

 

 

 

Edit: Malastare pretty much summed it up in his post (which I just read). /thread

Malastare did indeed describe it well and I agree with him on that one Edited March 21, 2014 by Macetheace

[TUXs]

What an odd topic. This is a GAME. It's not unethical in any way. Greed and a desire to make a profit is NOT unethical.

[Tygranir]

What an odd topic. This is a GAME. It's not unethical in any way. Greed and a desire to make a profit is NOT unethical.

 

Totally agree. SWTOR exists to make money. If you didn't know that going in, you are doing it wrong.

[Macetheace]

I hope bioware or anyone who's worked on the cartel market feel that I think they're damned if they do and damned if they don't sort of scenario.

 

it can be a tough question, strong feelings are involved usually because of the place entertainment and thus swtor has in the hearts of its community. For others, thouugh, justice, right and wrong are extremely important to em too, so the question would be raised to explore and try and get a conclusion. Do not take offense, but explore with us together.

[Infernixx]

Totally agree. SWTOR exists to make money. If you didn't know that going in, you are doing it wrong.

 

And when you break it down to its most basic aspects, if you're uncomfortable with how much focus a company puts on profit, your only real option is to simply find a competing business and give them your money instead.

 

Sadly, this isn't an option for all businesses, like cable companies and the electricity providers, but it 'is' an option in MMOs.

[DOHboy]

What an odd topic. This is a GAME. It's not unethical in any way. Greed and a desire to make a profit is NOT unethical.

 

I wouldn't even use the term greed.

 

they are a company, companies goal is to make money. The ideal is to make the largest return on minimal investment. Invest too little and make little, invest too much and you have a nice product but with little margin for profit.

 

profit creates jobs, profit creates growth, companies that don't make a profit end up going out of business pretty fast.

[TUXs]

And when you break it down to its most basic aspects, if you're uncomfortable with how much focus a company puts on profit, your only real option is to simply find a competing business and give them your money instead.

 

Sadly, this isn't an option for all businesses, like cable companies and the electricity providers, but it 'is' an option in MMOs.

 

EXACTLY! It's actually very easy to end the greed that has infested MMOs...we STOP BUYING THEIR CRAP. But...we don't and they continue. It's like people complaining about Walmart while shopping there.

[Macetheace]

What an odd topic. This is a GAME. It's not unethical in any way. Greed and a desire to make a profit is NOT unethical.

 

the game is not fixed, it grows organically, and thus when new features are introduced some may raise a question that was not previously necessary to ask. The Cartel Market is one such, which is why it is not a "non-issue" and why I wanted it explored.

 

Greed is very unethical, morally wrong and detrimental to you and others around it, FLEE from it, abandon it, don't encourage it in yourself. The desire to make profit is not however in and of itself if it is tempered, not when it is a slave of greed then it becomes a destructive matter. It's good to make profit even healthy, but not if it si your be all and end all, and your all consuming drive.. and not if you cross the line to do it - intentionally hurt people, exploit people, destroy peoples lives etc.

 

when you command or control such large amounts of resources like finances, you have a duty and resonsilibiity to handle it wisely and responsibly. You have to ask yourself these tough questions because a lot more is in the balance now, and people are involved. WE don't live on an island, always bear that in mind. So examine yourself and act fairly, wisely and generously, and f if you notice something wrong or something doens't sit well with that basis, addresss it.

[DarthTHC]

the game is not fixed, it grows organically, and thus when new features are introduced some may raise a question that was not previously necessary to ask. The Cartel Market is one such, which is why it is not a "non-issue" and why I wanted it explored.

 

Greed is very unethical, morally wrong and detrimental to you and others around it, FLEE from it, abandon it, don't encourage it in yourself. The desire to make profit is not however in and of itself if it is tempered, not when it is a slave of greed then it becomes a destructive matter. It's good to make profit even healthy, but not if it si your be all and end all, and your all consuming drive.. and not if you cross the line to do it - intentionally hurt people, exploit people, destroy peoples lives etc.

 

when you command or control such large amounts of resources like finances, you have a duty and resonsilibiity to handle it wisely and responsibly. You have to ask yourself these tough questions because a lot more is in the balance now, and people are involved. WE don't live on an island, always bear that in mind. So examine yourself and act fairly, wisely and generously, and f if you notice something wrong or something doens't sit well with that basis, addresss it.

 

I appreciate everything you wrote in that post, but its connection to your original post confuses me.

 

I could see how it could be unethical to support a company that exploits workers, for example a company that uses child or slave labor (or a rough equivalent to slave labor) to produce its goods. That's pretty clear to me.

 

I could also see how it might be unethical to support a company that exploits its consumers, through monopoly or price-fixing, by forcing them to pay significantly more than they should for necessary items, among which I count housing, food, clothing, utilities, and transportation. And maybe some other things. But definitely not games.

 

I know there has been a lot of discussion on this thread and it's gone all over the place. But you seem pretty knowledgeable and passionate about ethics so I'll ask you directly... sort of turn the question around on you, if you will.

 

How could a completely optional, entertainment-based service be unethical at all? Assuming, of course, that they treat their employees fairly.

[TUXs]

the game is not fixed, it grows organically, and thus when new features are introduced some may raise a question that was not previously necessary to ask. The Cartel Market is one such, which is why it is not a "non-issue" and why I wanted it explored.

 

Greed is very unethical, morally wrong and detrimental to you and others around it, FLEE from it, abandon it, don't encourage it in yourself. The desire to make profit is not however in and of itself if it is tempered, not when it is a slave of greed then it becomes a destructive matter. It's good to make profit even healthy, but not if it si your be all and end all, and your all consuming drive.. and not if you cross the line to do it - intentionally hurt people, exploit people, destroy peoples lives etc.

 

when you command or control such large amounts of resources like finances, you have a duty and resonsilibiity to handle it wisely and responsibly. You have to ask yourself these tough questions because a lot more is in the balance now, and people are involved. WE don't live on an island, always bear that in mind. So examine yourself and act fairly, wisely and generously, and f if you notice something wrong or something doens't sit well with that basis, addresss it.

OMG LOL! Dude...they are a FOR PROFIT BUSINESS. It would be UNETHICAL of them to NOT make as much profit for their investors as they were capable of. They have no civic duty to give you free **** or treat you like anything but income (ask PvPers). This is PURE entertainment for profit, nothing more.

 

Don't like it, don't buy it. Nobody is being hurt, nobody is being taken advantage of and nothing is mandatory in this game...hell, it's freaking FREE TO PLAY even.

 

WE control this. WE can change it. Don't blame the company for YOUR inability to control yourself. They are NOT a babysitter.

[DOHboy]

EXACTLY! It's actually very easy to end the greed that has infested MMOs...we STOP BUYING THEIR CRAP. But...we don't and they continue. It's like people complaining about Walmart while shopping there.

 

with MMOs it is very easy to vote with your money, since there are multiple ways (Subscriptions, Cartel Market, and even competition).

 

however, in other games it becomes more difficult but still possible. Games like Madden, Battlefield, etc. that release almost annually with little change one simply does not purchase said game unless the changes are significant enough to result in further puchases. However, NOT purchasing it, could lead to the result of a game no longer being produced and the genre evaporating.

 

Games like Diablo3 are even worse. Piles of hype and demand, but do no offer the return one expected. Thus you pay the initial price, and are stuck since at best your recourse is to stop playing (but company already has your money so meh to you).

 

Making games/movies/entertainment in general can be a very risky business. And where there is risk, there needs to be equal reward.

 

Movies are notorious for this. 1 or 2 block busters are year will make their entire movie budget for the year, where as their "profit" comes from the cheap low budget movies that do well. A blockbuster that flops can be catastrophic to a movie company if nto offset by gains otherplaces.

 

what the op is trying to do, and is actually mixing is the term "ethics" and "morals" it is ethical to defend a mass murderer, in fact they are ethically required to do so... morally it might be abhorrent, but ethically justified.

 

Morals are up to the individually, ethics are a legal definition.

[DarthTHC]

OMG LOL! Dude...they are a FOR PROFIT BUSINESS. It would be UNETHICAL of them to NOT make as much profit for their investors as they were capable of. They have no civic duty to give you free **** or treat you like anything but income (ask PvPers). This is PURE entertainment for profit, nothing more.

 

Don't like it, don't buy it. Nobody is being hurt, nobody is being taken advantage of and nothing is mandatory in this game...hell, it's freaking FREE TO PLAY even.

 

WE control this. WE can change it. Don't blame the company for YOUR inability to control yourself. They are NOT a babysitter.

 

I think you read a lot more into his post than what he wrote, or perhaps I've missed other posts of his.

 

The post you quoted said it's perfectly OK for a company to make a profit, but when that company starts making a profit at the expense of causing collateral damage, then it becomes a problem. If a company were to create a pesticide, but that pesticide turned out making its way into the rest of the ecosystem and started to cause the extinction of entire swaths of wildlife, that would be a problem, right?

 

 

Not that this could ever happen in a game, but it's clearly one example of how considering only profit can be unethical.

[Jadescythe]

What's with all of the attempts at intelligent discussion around societal implications? You guys realize this is a Star Wars video game, right? If you feel your ethics are coming into play, you should probably take a vacation or something...

[TUXs]

I think you read a lot more into his post than what he wrote, or perhaps I've missed other posts of his.

 

The post you quoted said it's perfectly OK for a company to make a profit, but when that company starts making a profit at the expense of causing collateral damage, then it becomes a problem. If a company were to create a pesticide, but that pesticide turned out making its way into the rest of the ecosystem and started to cause the extinction of entire swaths of wildlife, that would be a problem, right?

 

 

Not that this could ever happen in a game, but it's clearly one example of how considering only profit can be unethical.

It's a video game. This is you arguing just to freaking argue.

 

Bioware is not your keeper. Their job is to sell you video games that you spend $ on. Don't like it, don't buy it. No hidden agenda, nothing secret...it's very obvious to all consenting parties.

[TravelersWay]

but then it was never the case of whether trading was ethically wrong - so maybe we can safely say having a cartel market available isn't ethically wrong for the purpose it serves - but you must hten explore purpose. and as I mentioned earlier somewhere you have an obligation to do so, both for yourself and for others.,

 

No, there is no obligation, at least there isn't one depending on the context of morality being discussed. If the context was involving a company exploiting human suffering for gain, then yes, there is an obligation to discuss and punish if necessary. However, we are not in that context. This context is about a system in a game that by the very nature is not exploitative. Therefore, there is no obligation to explore anything other than "Can I afford this," which is a personal decision that encompasses anything not necessary for survival.

 

it can be a tough question, strong feelings are involved usually because of the place entertainment and thus swtor has in the hearts of its community. For others, thouugh, justice, right and wrong are extremely important to em too, so the question would be raised to explore and try and get a conclusion. Do not take offense, but explore with us together.

Again, the exploration of justice needs to be taken within the proper context. If one holds the ideals of Justice and Doing Right in such high regard, then one must ensure that one's efforts are being put to effective use. There are many injustices and wrongs in the world. Comparitively speaking, what one game system may do wrong is no where near the types of injustices that occur in the world on a daily basis, so for one to focus such an effort on something that will ultimately provide little to no benefit for the greater good, then one is actually being disingenuous to the ideal of Justice and Doing Right.

 

If one truly wants to Do Right in the eyes of whatever God they believe in, then one ought to be expending their efforts sheltering the homeless and feeding the hungry. Not discussing the merits of microtransactions in a video game.

 

Greed is very unethical, morally wrong and detrimental to you and others around it, FLEE from it, abandon it, don't encourage it in yourself.

 

And thus we have the crux of the issue. Morality is a personal belief. Now, in many instances, multiple people can agree on similar beliefs of morality, and therefore establish common ground on what is right or wrong. However, there are also many things that cannot be agreed upon. Attempting a discussion in that context ultimately is pointless because people will always disagree on what is "Right" or "Wrong" based upon their own personal morality.

 

In the context of your OP and the quote you contained in there, coupled with your statement here and your signature means there was no need for discussion on this topic in the first place. Again, morality and ethics are personal issues. You needed to decide for yourself whether you think the CM is about greed or not. No one else can decide that for you. Discussing it will ultimately have no benefit because this is something you should have already decided for yourself based on your personal beliefs. Personally speaking, not making any accusations here - just observations, your statements have a very similar tone to a former user on the forums who disliked the cartel market.

Edited March 21, 2014 by TravelersWay

[DarthTHC]

It's a video game. This is you arguing just to freaking argue.

 

Bioware is not your keeper. Their job is to sell you video games that you spend $ on. Don't like it, don't buy it. No hidden agenda, nothing secret...it's very obvious to all consenting parties.

 

I completely agree when we're talking the context of a game (assuming it treats its employees fairly). My post a few above yours turns the very same question around on the same post you quoted.

 

I'm also not the one who flipped out after misreading a post. You might want to re-read the post of Macetheace's that you quoted and what you wrote. You made some leaps.

Edited March 21, 2014 by DarthTHC