FC's response to the survey

Conan Exiles General Discussion
80

I’m going to tell you right now. Everything you type on the internet is being used to open peoples’ wallets. You should just assume it at this point. Right now in this thread, our conversation is being used. By Funcom, by search engines, by hackers, sniffers, and various other entities.

You can use a VPN to avoid being traced, but the fact is, you wrote it, I wrote it, and it can still be seen in public. Which means it is used.

Its best to assume whenever you make an action on the internet that worst case scenario is not only likely but happened. In the past tense, after you post anything.

82

For most it is not just about personal data, but how personal the questions are. The psychoanalyzing to see if there is a microtransaction market, or pay wall for better content is what really disappoints us. As gamers, our culture is to support game companies that are not typical “big brother” types. And this survey leans toward that feeling, whether true or not.

3 Likes
83

You all brought it up by asking for transparency. I gave you the information you asked for.

What did you actually want to hear? Ignasis coming in here saying “I promise to keep this data with us and not allow third parties to see it.”

Would you all have believed them in that case? No of course not. And they’re not going to say it because we know that’s not true anyway. Its given out. Probably sold by Immersyve themselves which is why companies like Funcom get their services at the price they can afford.

Its like when I hire a guy to take down 80ft pine trees in my yard at $100 a piece. The reason why its so cheap is he’s making a killing selling the lumber. He doesn’t tell me that when he makes the offer. But there’s nothing nefarious about it. I want the trees gone and he’ll do it for cheap. I’m not able to take them down myself to make whatever their worth. So he helps himself by helping me.

85

Having completed this survey, it wasn’t much different to the last gaming survey I did for Playground Games for Forza Horizon 4.

1 Like
87

I believe they have given you the answers they are going to give already.

89

I’ve read three threads so far. Is there a fourth one?

91

Is there a fourth thread or not?

92

You’re barking up the wrong tree there. Another company performed the survey and collected the data. FC paid them to do it and will more than likely get a nice fat report at the end but they’re not the one holding the bag (of responses) here. And my bet is they have very limited if any control over that data and it was probably all set in stone in a contract at the start of it all, meaning any discussion here is purely for entertainment sake because nothing substantial will come of it.

I get that you don’t understand why it’s relevant. That doesn’t mean it isn’t relevant and frankly I’ve already explained what it’s used for as simply as I could. If you still don’t get it after that not much I can help you with there.

Probably because you’re disregarding what it actually means. If you feel uncomfortable with the questions, don’t answer them. Problem solved.

Privacy of what? There’s no personally identifying information being collected. And as noted remarks about personal data collection are dishonest. Absolutely nothing in the survey gathered information that would be categorized as such by the EU, let alone the US or anywhere else in the world.

I’ve read it. Just like how you think I’m not the right channel to answer your hyperbolic demands of assurances, you aren’t in a position to declare something not relevant. This is the field I work in, and while I understand you don’t see how many of the questions were relevant, they’re actually very common in surveys like this. I agree, the questions at face value seem ridiculous and don’t seem to matter, they do. The way people answer those seemingly unrelated questions can impact their answers to other things in ways that can be demonstrated when parsing the data across a large set of responses. You don’t have to believe me or even agree with me. I’m just trying to provide some insight that you clearly lack on the subject. Take it as you will.

Cool. Not a field I can work in so I applaud your fortitude. I’m good crunching numbers and avoid even doing that for marketing if at all possible. I don’t have any doubt they’re going to use the data for more than just Conan Exiles. That’s the nature of companies that do data collection like this. But I don’t really sweat it regardless. When it boils down to it this is a game, a form of entertainment. I dig it a lot and look forward to what the future brings, but if it turns in a direction I don’t like (i.e. microtransactions or pay to win, and no I don’t consider the DLC’s to be that at all) then I bail. There are plenty of other games out there that are similar to Conan and more will come. I’m certainly not surprised that companies are studying the threshold that the average customer will continue to play and pay more to have an easier go of it. Some of course will. And some, like me, will just move on when that happens. Companies are in it to make money and as a marketing guy it’s confusing to me that them (or a third party) trying to make those assessments is something you get riled up about. Am I off here?

I understand your frustration here, but take a step back a moment. That’s an intentional choice to only allow people who complete that portion to answer questions specific to CE. That tells me a lot about how they intend to parse the data. If they wanted people who were going to opt out of those specific questions they could have done so, but they didn’t. Think about that. They did not want feedback about Conan if it did not include answers to those general life/personality questions.

I’m happy to read and respond even if you disagree or whether you think telling me over and over again that only FC is allowed to answer you. It’s all entertainment to me. But just for the fun of it, if you know what the questions on the survey were why don’t you give FC your answers to the CE specific questions here. Hell, make a thread dedicated to people doing that or something. You don’t have to do the survey to give them your feedback. Plus I enjoy threads where people talk about things they like/dislike in the game and what would make it better in their eyes. It’s far more productive and positive than this thread is.

93

So maybe we need to calm down and clarify certain things.

First of all, thank you, @Kapoteeni, for going to the trouble to explain about the legal aspect of the privacy issue. A lot of people don’t know these details, and they’re important to know. Problem is, a lot of people also don’t separate the legality of the issue from all the other aspects, and that includes many people who do have a decent enough understanding of the legal aspect.

Which brings me to the following:

@Taemien is right, but I don’t think the suggestion would help. Yes, “personal data collection” is a term that has legal ramifications. But the questions we’re talking about aren’t just “uncomfortable”, they really are personal. They’re just not PII (personally identifiable information), and therefore do not fall under those legal ramifications.

This is why it’s very important to separate the legality of the issue from everything else. Lots of things used to be perfectly legal, but they aren’t anymore, because they’re not right. I’m not going to give any examples, because I don’t want people riled, but I’m sure everyone here can easily come up with an example of their own.

I’m pretty sure that many, if not most, of the people who are complaining about the survey aren’t as concerned about the legality of these questions as they are about the morality of them. This is probably the point in my post where there will be a lot of eye-rolling, because I dare drag the word “morality” into the discussion, but bear with me for a bit longer :wink:

I’m not trying to blow this out of proportion and claim that Funcom is doing something immoral. I simply mentioned “morality” because it’s the best word I can use to describe the situation when people are objecting to something because they don’t think it’s right. So let me repeat this: I am not saying that Funcom did anything immoral.

Thing is, Funcom is a corporation. It’s not a person. And I believe that corporations are inherently amoral (which is not the same as immoral). That’s a problem that transcends the context of this survey and goes out of scope of these forums, but it’s something that is useful to keep in mind in discussions like these.

The reason why I took this meandering route through “morality” is because of Funcom’s response. Like I said before, it’s very clear. Or at least, it’s clear if you can keep the legality and morality separate, and you understand that corporations aren’t people and don’t behave like people.

The response is clear, because it clearly states:

  • Funcom’s reasons for having this survey done: research into players’ motivations
  • the legality of the survey: it’s completely voluntary and opt-in
  • the separation between Funcom and Immersyve

It’s also clear because of what it does not state:

  • There is no mention of privacy, because there are no legal privacy concerns. As the survey itself states on the very first page, there is no personal data being collected. These are legal terms, so this means they’re not collecting PII.
  • There is no discussion of the personal (not PII) questions. This is because Ignasis wrote this on behalf of Funcom, the corporation. Regardless of what he thinks or believes, he was acting on behalf of Funcom, and Funcom does not have any specific “feelings” about these questions.

It looks all clear to me. My personal interpretation is:

  • There is no breach of privacy.
  • Funcom did nothing illegal.
  • Funcom did not force you or coerce you.
  • Funcom considers this survey to be useful.

And that is why I said making more threads is pointless.

@Palm522, please don’t take this wrong. I am not telling you to stop posting about this. I am not telling you how to behave at all. But I do think that you need to understand the facts. There is no legal issue here. There are no legal obligations to be fulfilled when it comes to transparency, or personal data collection, or privacy, or anything like that. You can keep posting and arguing all you want, but you will most likely not get a more satisfactory or a more useful answer out of Funcom.

Sure, there’s a slim chance that one of the people from Funcom will step up and say something along the lines of how it’s regrettable that this survey caused frustration and discomfort. Or whatever. And if they do that, maybe some people here will feel slightly better. But nothing will really change. Funcom spent money on this survey, and they’re going to get their results back and use them however they see fit. And there’s nothing legally wrong with that.

The final outcome of the survey remains to be seen. Until then, no amount of outrage and demands is going to change anything. We’re all free to like it or not.

EDIT: I just want to make it clear, before anyone accuses me of being a hypocrite, that nothing I wrote here changes or contradicts my own personal opinions on the survey. I disliked it immensely and I think it’s invasive and distasteful and shouldn’t have been done.

11 Likes
94

This is really well said.

2 Likes
95

I agree with @Taemien. Well written.

People have different comfort levels with disclosing information even if it’s not PII. My interpretation, and maybe I’m off here, is that @Palm522 wants to give feedback too but since he can’t due to his objection to the first portion of the questions that that has gotten the focus. I also get the complaints about the company that conducted the survey. While I don’t agree that there’s anything immoral about those questions I absolutely get that some people might not be comfortable answering them or might want to give feedback without answering those specific questions.

So give the feedback here on the forums. Seriously. I’m sure FC folks would be happy to have more feedback about the game. It’s not like they put out the survey and then stopped listening to people here. Then it’s at least productive and positive.

2 Likes
98

You absolutely nailed it. I’m not pretending for a moment that FC has possibly done anything illegal. Immoral? Maybe. Unethical? Yeah, I think so. Because I think microtransactions, gamble crates, “pay to win” and introducing psychologically addictive mechanics to keep people logged in longer and deliberately built in “frustration points” that will make people more likely to make in-game purchases is definitely unethical. So a survey probing players to see just how accepting they are of any of that is definitely unethical IMHO. That’s definitely NOT what I paid for when I purchased this game in pre-release, purchased Isle of Siptah in pre-release, and purchased multiple copies (as gifts and giveaways to the roleplaying community I host) of each and every DLC. I really don’t want to once again be in a position where I sink a bunch of money into a game only to eventually have to abandon it as I did with ESO as its business practices become steadily more and more unethical as time passes.

As for the data collection, the only thing I’m “concerned” about (and since I did the whole survey twice obviously I’m not all THAT concerned) is what the survey makers are going to be doing with it. Obviously my answers to the survey are going to be used far beyond just Funcom’s internal use for just this one game in their lineup. At a minimum it’s going to be used to help make decisions about Dune as its also going to be a survival game, probably rather like CE. And that’s fine. I want to LIKE Dune. And I’m very sure Immersyve is going to use it in larger money making projects of their own. Also fine actually. But if they are selling my IP address? NOT FINE. And if they are, they need to state that they are up front. If they’d done that, even though I don’t like it, I’d have probably still taken the survey. The “personal” questions about happiness and mood with no opt out to answering them if you want to take the parts of the survey that matter to you were just crass and disgusting. Indeed, unethical.

5 Likes
99

I play games because they are fun. The minute they stop being fun I stop playing them. Many of the things that survey is putting out feelers for are NOT fun and will ruin the enjoyment of the game I’ve already spent a fair chunk of money on and host 3 servers for so I pay a decent chunk of money every month just to play it as well. So yes the idea of introducing mechanics meant to make the game NOT fun unless you pay for a way around them DOES absolutely appall me.

5 Likes
100

You’re the one telling people that you’ll only accept answers from FC.

Nah, you’re not understanding my point. I don’t know if it’s a language thing or that I’m not spelling it out. I’ll try addressing the latter. To me that means one of two things (could be more but these are the two I find most likely). The first possibility is that FC contracted with Immersyve, gave them a set of questions they wanted answers to, Immersyve (as part of the cost of doing the survey) added questions that they could use in tandem with the data FC wanted and added those non-CE specific questions to the list at the start. Meaning the data is only useful to them if those answers are given because they can then market the collective set of data in their business in some capacity. We know what they do as that was linked above. The second possibility is that they need that first set of data (the questions you object to) to categorize the second set (the CE specific questions). They could have a lot of surveys on hand that they’ve done for other things that include these types of questions and they need to ask them to match them up into a much larger dataset (someone here already stated they’ve taken other game surveys recently that had similar questions). Neither of those mean the survey was for a different purpose than what FC said it was for. There’s nothing manipulative about it unless you have some information that you haven’t shared (and yes I’ve read the entire thread, there’s nothing there demonstrating such).

I’m sorry but I can’t take slippery slope arguments seriously.

Why do you need FC to tell you if you provided PII on the survey? Did you give them your full name, date of birth, social security number (I’m in the US and don’t know equivalents in other countries), address, phone number … any 3 pieces of data that in combination can be used to identify you specifically off the internet? Because I can tell you, they didn’t ask for anything remotely close to that on the survey and if you wrote those things in you did so of your own choice with no prompting from them. You don’t seem to understand what personal data actually is or how it works. Do you think they secretly traced over the internet while you were doing the survey and gathered this information unbeknownst to you? That’s not how that works.

Exactly. Problem solved.

Did I say you were breaking anything by choosing not to answer? The question doesn’t make sense.

This is getting into conspiracy theory territory now. Queue the X-Files theme song?

103

I’m totally on board with feeling like they’re trying to ask us what the sweet spot was where we’d be frustrated enough to spend money to progress but not frustrated enough to stop playing/paying. I’m just not under the illusion that they haven’t been trying to do exactly that forever in every market for every product. It’s gotten more sophisticated and it’s less hidden behind the curtain, but this aspect has always been there. I get the desire to push back against it. But it’s not unethical or immoral. It’s business. Hell that’s marketing and executives jobs. Sell more of the product, reduce costs even if it means cutting development time and pushing the product out the door before it’s ready, and make as much money on it as possible. And they’ve been using psychology for a long, long time to decide how far they can go even in gaming. There’s no fighting it. Our only power lies in our wallets. If enough people choose to buy into such a system that they make more money than they lose by people like you and me walking away, then it’s still a win for them. So enjoy games while you have them, remember the good times you had, move on to greener pastures and don’t look back if it does. I’ll be doing the same if that line is crossed. The saving grace here is that not all games are doing it and there are other options for people who don’t want to deal with systems like that.

2 Likes
104

I did read the post. In fact the OP and I have had a good exchange, we’re more or less on the same page. The problem is, you didn’t like what Ignasis said in the other thread and when I pointed out that was the answer Funcom gave, you decided to take it out on me for one reason or another.

Send Ignasis your tantrum instead of me. I’m not the station to take your trainwreck to. That is unless you want to get your feelings hurt and another thread locked. Personally I don’t think the OP deserves that.

1 Like
106

You didn’t even read Funcom’s response then.

Go read it.

108

Then you didn’t get it. Try reading it again.

110

Take an English course again then reread this:

https://forums.funcom.com/t/immersyve-survey/164895/166?u=taemien

111

NGL as I combed through Immersyve’s website I totally queued the Black Mirror music in my head. It IS creepy. I mean we know psychology has been used against consumers by advertising companies since at least the 1930s. Look into the campaign that got women to start smoking if you really want to be disgusted. But yes, at this point that kind of thing is common practice. And just as smoking isn’t good for you neither is “gambling” (paying money for a small “chance” you might get an elusive digital item you want) and being manipulated to keep your head in a game far beyond the mount of hours that are healthy. So when a game starts doing those very things yeah, we’ve entered Creepy Land. Now are people responsible for whether or not they smoke, do drugs, gamble or play games to the point where it has a detrimental effect on their life? Absolutely personal responsibility is paramount. Just like no one can MAKE you take that survey, no one can MAKE you do any of those other things either. But I maintain that using our knowledge of psychology to sway people to act against their own self interest, to engage in behaviors that are detrimental to them, is deeply unethical. And we’re already all but drowning in a world where we are confronted by people and companies that are doing just that. There’s no conspiracy theory at work here. It’s well known and well understood that psychological manipulation is being employed against consumers in pursuit of profit with no consideration towards the well being of the consumer. That has been the case all of my life so it’s definitely been the case throughout the lives of most people here because there’s not a lot of you that are a whole lot older than me. Most of you are younger.

When a game starts trying to sway you towards doing any of the things I’ve just discussed here, the company making that game has become the “friend” who nags you to have “just one more” drink at the bar before you drive home. And when that happens… you need to get new friends.

2 Likes