I’m not going to bother explaining my position over and over again Puny. I already know from past arguments that you are technically incapable of actually addressing the opposing argument, which is why I never actually want to argue. You are welcome to your opinion, mine remains unchanged.
2 Likes
The thread really blew up. It was a nice read.
I am still iffy on the way it was delivered, as a lot of people seems to be too (On the US forums also) but I guess for myself it is mainly because I still need to improve my english.
Also people, yes some of you are angry, it’s understandable, but don’t jump on Puny and Jito, they are allowed to have their view on it too.
Except it’s the other way around. The rest of us aren’t allowed to have our view.
I have an opinion on them funding the tournament this way yes.
But that does not interfere with the fact that they did exactly what they said they were going to do without deceiving anyone.
In your opinion. It’s not a fact.
You are allowed an opinion, we’ve said that time and time again.
However you are going past an opinion into false claims.
1 Like
Sorry, but no.
Yes xD
They said they would raise funds via a toy and make up the difference, they guaranteed a minimum prize fund.
They did that.
Facts
2 Likes
I don’t see that, I only see two opposite side argueing, which is normal in these cases. People are willing to keep their opinions ? That is fine too, just disagree and don’t argue with them anymore.
Then respectfully, you are blind. I told Puny from the beginning, this is my opinion, you are welcome to yours. She keeps replying that she owns the final truths. I don’t actually care what opinion Puny has or anyone else, they are welcome to have it.
I can honestly understand some think it was a cheapskate move funding it via toy.
I can see that some would prefer Blizzard to put up a stake then use the sales as a top up.
But they didn’t say they would do those things.
1 Like
If I don’t have my glasses, yes !
2 Likes
Since I can’t manage to double quote on mobile I’ll double post :
I can understand the fact that most of us could have percieved it wrongly, but as you stated in the first 2 sentences, I don’t like how greedy it looks, feels really cheap.
1 Like
It will be interesting to see if other tournaments do the same.
Some players are happy to buy inexpensive items that are in game cosmetics. Many will buy toys, mounts, pets etc even without any interest in the competitions they are gathering prize funds for.
They clearly sold a lot of them to raise that much money.
1 Like
Oh yea sure, of course people love goodies, I love them myself. A lot of games do that too, raising the pools with skins and such.
“Guaranteed” is the key word in that statement that makes it very clear. There was no doubt for me that it is max(crowdfunds, 500K) and not crowdfunds+500K. Otherwise it would be written as “starting at 500K” and not “guaranteed minimum of 500K”.
1 Like
Maybe they just didn’t expect these toys would sell that well, now the 25% is > than the minimum 500k.
But here’s the thing, if e.g. the 25% was 250k, then they’d e.g. top it to 500k. That 250K came from them, they other 750k was also for them, so they can take it from there…and then you could say, it’s fully crowdfunded, but they would in that case use their own money as well (since the 75% was for them I think). If I was them, I’d probably add the 500k, or top it to maybe 1.000k.
That being said, the extra money would come from them, and could also be taken from the 75%, thus some people would then again say it’s fully crowdfunded. So then it’s their fault these toys sold that well? huh huh…
1 Like
Penny pinching sobs…
They could have said nothing about fund raising and just sold some items to raise the money and we’d be none the wiser but I get the impression from the marketing that they wanted to give players the feel that they were contributing.
2 Likes