Tencent and chinese influence

Was that previously a major marketing angle? :smiley:

I remain cautious about what influence Tencent will have. I freaked initially but I am off of the ceiling now a little. I get that companies have to bend a little to fit within the mores of all of their markets, but would be uncomfortable if it rippled back into the more liberal markets…

1 Like

You can say that again :slight_smile: I had to. I just had to.

2 Likes

The only problem I see with bending is, that what in the company’s book would be okay for western countries is not ok for others. If you bend too much, you tend to lose something called principles, which in the end make a society what they are. I think tolerance in western world is not the same as tolerance in eastern world. Money wise you’d like to get to all markets, but, would you be selling bullets to the most violent person?, that’s where principles come in place. Some do have, others don’t. Not that worries me much, since I as everyone have my own, and most of the time am able to make decisions accordingly (not always since some things are imposed whether you like them or not), such is our world today.

I have read the article you posted Whatmighthavebeen with interest, gives a certain perspective of how gaming industry is behaving in this field.

1 Like

I’d be interested to know how they were forced to modify their behavior on unmoderated servers. The nudity is a setting for the servers, but no one is logging in to check their names. I’ve seen all kinds in Mandarin.

The main point is that Tencent buying 5% isn’t going to ruin the game for the world. Tencent has a large stake in Epic Games, and they’ve come out on the freedom of speech side in this whole Blizz debacle. I get people in the western world freak about it, but reports of Funcom joining the Party and banning fun are premature.

*Future Funcom meetings😂

1 Like

Absolutely. One of the pals I’ve acquired is named ****_XL, we first met when Combat rolled out. I think it was on TestLive_US3, when it was designated as Combat. His name is not censored for profanity, but for anonymity.

I built a nice base on one of the tooth ruins just north of Lakewatch. His clan was built into Westwatch Keep. As you can imagine, we overlapped a bit with regard to our aspirations. I hit his spammed foundations manually, surgically, and he retorted by blowing my elevator off the tooth. Finally it came to his desire to express superiority.

Up on the ruins across from me, one day after I logged in to both elevators and some crens removed, there was the largest, blingiest ****_Xl you ever saw. I watched, in real time, as his stream on Huya first showed disdain, then outright flight. Eventually one of the sanitation mods came by and asked him to change his moniker. All because a lower-case “L” looks like an “i.”

good laugh

1 Like

Well, yes, his ego probably is that fragile, but that’s not the main reason they did it.

What you have to understand is that in communist governments, the government is god. They need their people to believe that the government and, by extension, the leaders within that government are perfect in every way, and that they are the ultimate authority on everything. Unlike the general population which of course would be lost without the government to take care of them. In fact in some countries they take it so far as to make their people believe that their leader, for all intents and purposes, actually is a demigod. It’s how they are able to maintain so much psychological control over their people. (That and their penchant for disappearing anyone who questions or criticizes them.)

So, comparing the government or leader of said government to a cartoon bear sends a message that runs contrary to what they need their people to believe. Particularly when that cartoon bear is a bit of a goofball with less than average intelligence. Thus to prevent any possibility of dissent, they needed to stamp out that idea as quickly and effectively as possible.

By the way, they’ve also banned the letter ‘N’ at one point.

2 Likes

That’s twice today I’ve seen you attempt to minimize someone’s concern on behalf of the company, with very little substance, logic or nuance behind your response.

It’s been brought up by 3 people, all working for Funcom. That’s hardly reassuring. And in fact, it’s what you would expect as a response from those inside the company whom are speaking to any perceived problem, real or imagined.

At the minimum, a major shareholder will be afforded some reasonable level ask. However, a shareholder based in or under the influence of China will be afforded a level of influence over their own domestic market with little effort. If you think little Funcom is going to buck the trend that Apple, IBM, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Nintendo, Oracle, Cisco, Siemens, Samsung, Motorola and Nortel (just to name a few) all follow, well then you are living in a fantasy world.

Products are changed all the time to accommodate the sensibilities of foreign markets. Disney, for example, is well known for this. China takes this to another level. If you want to do business in China, the state wants a look under the hood of your product, they want the schematics and they want you to, in some cases, allow for local (usually state owned) companies take over distribution. China will absolutely dictate to Funcom what and how they ship to mainland China…without being indirectly in control of nearly 30% share ownership of a company. But, with that kind of influence, Bejing will be getting exactly what they want when they want it.

3 Likes

Thats exactly what i fear, out of love, not ill will. I get the David vs Goliat feeling when i read about this… problem.

What i understand, in this case, China bought shares from a 3rd party, not not as a result of a backstage agreement with Funcom. That gives me some hope.

1 Like

Junkie_XL, the composer from Snyder DC movies lol.

2 Likes

That’s so meta my comic book collection spontaneously combusted.

1 Like

Guess they got all the green backs they are getting from me.

The US plans their future 4 years a a time,

The Chinese, 1000 years at a time.

They can wait

Apple and Cisco have their components made in China, Samsung has just stopped Chinese production a few days ago, the PC branch of IBM was bought by Lenovo (Chinese company) 15 years ago, China is the second Facebook customer and Chinese mobile developers bring between 1 and 1.5 billion to Facebook on a single quarter, etc.

These companies are clearly dependent on the Chinese market at an unimaginable level. We are not just talking about investors here. It is obvious that “Little Funcom” is not so dependent on China.

2 Likes

While I kind of agree with the idea that what Blitzchung did was probably not appropriate for the venue, the thing I think you might be missing here is the severity of the punishment. To both Blitzchung and the broadcasters who just happened to be there. That’s why people aren’t buying the BS that it had nothing to do with China.

Well, that and the statement from Blizzard to the Chinese stating in no uncertain terms that they condemn Blitzchung’s actions and will defend China’s pride. This would be at the same time they’re telling everyone else that the reason was Blitzchung violated a rule that says Blizzard can ban you and rescind your prize money for, well, any reason they want really.

Their motivations are crystal clear in this case. Everything they’re doing now is damage control after they realized that being so eager to kowtow to the Chinese government so they don’t lose the Chinese market has cost them respect in every other market. And as a consequence of that, money as well.

2 Likes

2019 HEARTHSTONE® GRANDMASTERS OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES v1.4 p.12, Section 6.1 (o)

Engaging in any act that, in Blizzard’s sole discretion, brings you into public disrepute, offends a portion or group of the public, or otherwise damages Blizzard image will result in removal from Grandmasters and reduction of the player’s prize total to $0 USD, in addition to other remedies which may be provided for under the Handbook and Blizzard’s Website Terms.

The rule is clear, it was written before the tournament started, he broke the rule, but the conspiracy theorists remain convinced that Blizzard reacted like that only because it concerns China.

What should Blizzard have done? “This player broke a rule punished by a removal and loss of cashprize, but do not do anything because people will believe that China puts pressure on us.”

Be serious. I admit that we may have doubts because doubt is always allowed, but how can we say with certainty that Blizzard did that for China when the guy just broke the rules? How does punishing someone according to the rules show “crystal clear” motives?

With this victimization we will end up falling into the opposite way, which will consist of never daring to enforce the rules when China is concerned, for fear of being considered collaborators of China.

3 Likes

Right… just like China is taking over the U.S. because they own half of Manhatten. That was real big in the 90’s and never really came to anything. They are investing their money and want a high return on it. That is why they make the purchases and leave the companies independent. If they tried to control them, the buyers will go with other companies that are willing to provide the content and games players want.

5 Likes

Oh I am quite serious. Blizzard’s actions are the result of not wanting to offend the Chinese government for fear of reprisal in the form of losing the Chinese market. A fear that does in fact have precedent.

Blitzchung made a statement supporting Hong Kong. Blizzard panicked and banned him and the broadcasters and took away his winnings, and then started bowing and apologizing to China while at the same time using a rule so vague that it lets them do anything as justification for their actions to the rest of the world. Then there’s the comparatively long delay in punishing the American University players for doing the same thing.

You can try to spin this and deny it any way you like, but the fact is their relationship with China did influence their decision with regard to Blitzchung’s punishment. A decision, which I might add, they have since backed down from to something more reasonable.

2 Likes

In America. In China and every other communist country, not so much. That’s kind of what communism means, fyi.

3 Likes

They shouldn’t. But of course, that’s the wrong question to ask. :wink: