Live data from Hacker News

Literally worse than EA

notch.net

111–120 of 141 posts

Re: Literally worse than EA

#111
post #63
post #31

Oh wow. Minecraft. I have an 8yo boy, so I spend a lot more time thinking about this than I would like. I think Mojang has it's priorities slightly wrong here. At the moment much of the interesting stuff in Minecraft is done via mods. But the user experience for that is pretty close to pre-Google search: browse through random forums to find links to dodgy download sites that attempt to push malware or porn to you. Th…

I'd much rather people pay for stability. Tricking people to pay for 64 bytes of code and a new color pallet for a diamond encrusted pixel sword in order to offer stability was a mistake. Education needed to happen, this shit is hard, and it's a lot of work. When I go to a store, I don't see a sign "Pizza is free" only to walk over and find that if I want to put toppings on the pizza, well those cost $0.99 per single…

What does "pay for stability" mean? Is this actually an actionable business plan?

Re: Literally worse than EA

#112
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> inability to find buyers for the ad slots given the perceived demographic I would love for you to expand on that. Is there an age range that no buyers in the ad business are interested in? What aspect of the demographic was toxic to them? How do they measure how effective a demographic is?

What I can't understand is how there is so much money in YouTube views for the same demographic. Who is buying ads on Tobuscus, Captain Sparklez, etc. for a primarily 8-12 year old male audience? I guess I could just watch some and see, if I could stand it.

I get that you don't enjoy their content, but it seems like you are missing the point on purpose just to shit on those creators.

Every basic cable channel has ads, including ones mostly watched by children. Nick Jr type shows are pretty intolerable to me, but I get it - it's eyeballs.

The channels you're describing have long videos with high engagement, viewers watching multiple 15+ min videos in a row are some of the most valuable on YouTube.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#113
post #107
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children aren't smart, this much is known. This is fighting the symptom, not the cause. The real issue is that children who can't spend their money responsibly shouldn't have that money in the first place . If we go by the assumption that a child won't know when they're paying for a legitimate product or being exploited then why give them any money? If they don't spend it on a pay-to-win server then they'll spend it…

Now apply your line of reasoning back to the elderly. It feels weird to say the words when you're pointing them at a higher-status group.

Elderly people who are incapable of understanding their own actions also shouldn't be left to care for themselves, and generally aren't.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#114
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If kids outwit their parents and spend their money then that's the parents fault, not the servers. True, the parents can't always be everywhere which is why they need to teach children to act responsibly. If that kid keeps continuously taking money out of your bank account when you're not looking and blowing it on Minecraft then the parent is doing something wrong. If there was no Minecraft they'd spend the money on…

That's ridiculous. Some ten year old kid wants a $300 item on a Minecraft server. The kid has been told he can't use his parent's credit card without permission, he knows he can't, but guess what: even good kids break the rules, and he knows his parents have the money. He just saw them write a $5,000 check for his private tuition! (they want to raise him right) That $5,000 check though left them with $200 in the bank…

A "good kid" who breaks the rules isn't a "good kid", it's a bad one. If the parents never found out about the child spending the money, then the blame would not fall on them. However I don't consider this a very likely scenario not only because money doesn't tend to vanish into thin air, but because a responsible parent would monitor their child's spending. They might be able to get away with it for a while, but eventually they'll find out. If they gave them a $5000 check then they can't just forget about it, it doesn't magically vanish from under their noses. Even if they do just give the check and forget about it, it is again, their fault and theirs alone. They caused the scenario in which they couldn't monitor the child's spending. They can't assume the child will act responsibly; they need to monitor their spending. Kids aren't the exact molds their parents have shaped, but they should at least be taught basic survival skills, such as the ability to spend money responsibly.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#115
post #107
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children aren't smart, this much is known. This is fighting the symptom, not the cause. The real issue is that children who can't spend their money responsibly shouldn't have that money in the first place . If we go by the assumption that a child won't know when they're paying for a legitimate product or being exploited then why give them any money? If they don't spend it on a pay-to-win server then they'll spend it…

Now apply your line of reasoning back to the elderly. It feels weird to say the words when you're pointing them at a higher-status group.

As chc said, I wouldn't apply the same reasoning to elderly people. Also, the issue that most people were bringing up was that children specifically were being exploited, so the point is moot.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#116
post #106
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one buys mods, which is why they are hosted on terrible sharing services - it's the only way the developer can get any money.

Thats another interesting point, that FOSS or even shareware hasn't arrived in minecraft culture.

It has. There are a number of FOSS mods, but some of the best ones aren't.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#117
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Minecraft does not have an API currently. If you are making mods you are decompiling the original Minecraft java source code, modifying it, and releasing a modified version of their original works.

Actually their EULA states that you are not allowed to redistribute Mojang's code (compiled or decompiled) in any way. Mods are created using the decompiled client, and built against that. But when they are released, they do not contain any of Mojang's code. Installing mods is done by copying compiled .class files into the client .jar

> Installing mods is done by copying compiled .class files into the client .jar

This is no longer true, except for Forge. What you're talking about is the old-style mod system, which has been obsolete for some number of years; nowadays they're dynamically linked from iterating over the mods/ folder.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#118

Maybe this is a little off-topic, and I don't want to sound like an ungrateful player of minecraft. I actually really love the game and have put more hours into it than just about any other game but a few key titles like the Diablo, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout series. But, can someone explain to me how a game that has grossed roughly half a billion dollars (based on estimates I've read for all platforms) is still so f…

Is the modding community not offering enough for you? Just wondering, as it seems quite unusual for such a big hit to have modding encouraged the way minecraft does. (I know that part of this is due to Mojang being an indie studio). Other big studio with big selling franchise are barely having what would be considered as passable ten years ago (yes I am talking about the omni present call of duty x): no dedicated ser…

Essentially, the only reason there is a modding community for Minecraft is because it's Java-based and people can just decompile the shipped code and hack stuff onto it.

So you have the modding community adding value for free, while Mojang sells the game and takes the profits, but doesn't seem to be investing it back.

Re: Literally worse than EA

#119
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If kids outwit their parents and spend their money then that's the parents fault, not the servers. True, the parents can't always be everywhere which is why they need to teach children to act responsibly. If that kid keeps continuously taking money out of your bank account when you're not looking and blowing it on Minecraft then the parent is doing something wrong. If there was no Minecraft they'd spend the money on…

That's ridiculous. Some ten year old kid wants a $300 item on a Minecraft server. The kid has been told he can't use his parent's credit card without permission, he knows he can't, but guess what: even good kids break the rules, and he knows his parents have the money. He just saw them write a $5,000 check for his private tuition! (they want to raise him right) That $5,000 check though left them with $200 in the bank…

Then take away that kids computer and all technology, and ground them for a month.

These problems were solved by previous generations, when did parents become such pussies?

When my generation was growing up (and I'm only 29), if we acted up we were expecting a beating at home... And we didn't get our own computer, TV and iPad or console...

Re: Literally worse than EA

#120
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I generally don't think it'd be a good idea to give kids access to parental bank accounts. Maybe I'm wrong, but it just seems like a poor decision.

Guys, this isn't "about the kids", it's about all minecraft players and server admins. The contract doesn't only apply to kids, it applies to everyone. So saying this is a "poor decision" because you don't want to encourage kids to use their parents credit card... is a poor argument. (as an aside - I know zero kids that play minecraft, but I know an awful lot of adults that do... so let's not just jump and assume it'…

Most elementary school aged kids I have talked to play Minecraft. I heard from a teacher that it is the vast majority.
Post reply on HN