| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (25)

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 10:19AM aurickle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I agree with the players and the charity here. This is a virtual item. It costs next to nothing for Atlantica to offer it, so why only 5% going to charity? The only logical answer is that they were trying to use player charity for personal profit. They were counting on lots of nice people wanting to do something nice for the kids, and in the process they'd make a huge profit. This comes very close to being a scam, and it's good that they're getting raked over the coals for it.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 11:52AM Tom in VA said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I agree, Aurickle.

If you're going to offer a charity item -- make it 100% of the proceeds (and suck up the development/operating costs as an investment in "good public relations").

Otherwise, it looks a lot like exploitation of a charity for profit. Sheesh.
Reply

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 12:18PM Anatidae said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Got to agree there. If it were a physical product, I could see them donating to charity once the hard world costs were covered. In this case, virtual items? Well, at the very least match every purchase with a donation.

I call this a marketing ploy to sell more product. Imagine if someone game to your door asked for $100 donation and told you that he would give $5 of your money when we got back, but he needed the other $95 to cover his walking around your block.
Reply

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 10:27AM Omali said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
5%? Really?

J.K.Rowling donates over 80% of her spinoff books to charity, to various charities helping poor children. Not to compare the two, but 5% of $40 isn't a charitable donation, it's profiting off of charity and throwing them your pocket change.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 10:33AM Alex Oglitchkin said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
Could also be AO trying to get some money in hopes of keeping the servers free and running as long as they can. 5% is better than nothing at all. Blizzard has something like that with WoW where someone gets I think like $3 out of $12-15.

My guess is these little scrubs whined because they didn't have money to spend on the game and/or it gave something that could give others an unfair advantage.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 10:37AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
'Petulant' is the perfect word to describe that disgusting announcement copy.
This is a fantastic win against a borderline-illegal MMO organisation, and I sincerely hope the trend continues.
Take note, F2P's..

Just goes to show that it's worth expressing one's disdain against even the most seemingly useless battles.

Hooray!

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 11:33AM Holgranth said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
$2 out of $40?

Are you serious? I agree thats not charity thats a seriously ****ed up money grab trying to take advantage of warm hearted people.

I am one of the biggest critics of ""FREE"" games (Because they never are.) and this just reinforced my opinion.

The official QQing is the biggest pile of BULL EXCREMENT since Tasos last opened his mouth. Oh we just wanted to do somthing nice........

Doing somthing nice would have been giving 100% to charity, keeping 5% for yourself while scrouge mcduckish wouldn't have been the end of the world but giving the charity 5% for a virtual item?

You greedy basterds!

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 11:36AM Pingles said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Just the fact that they were keeping 95% of the payment for "operating costs" shows how charitable the company was.

If they were truly charitable they'd be willing to lose a couple bucks in the process of throwing some player money to a charity.

Sad to see the charity getting NOTHING now but nice to see a sham like this getting thrust into the light.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 11:45AM CCon99 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
That is pretty lame, AO was clearly trying to cash in off of the charity's name.

As much as I loathe most of SOE's business practices, at least they do charity right. They had an exclusive cash shop item in Free Realms, EQ, and EQ2. These items cost the player 500 station cash, which is equal to $5.00. For every one of these $5 items purchased, SOE would donate $10 to Child's Play up to $50,000. So basically they took your $5 and matched it for the charity. That's giving.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 2:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree on SOE except for that $50,000 limit. I got out my credit card and was ready to buy the FR Charity Pet (and 2 others as well) until I saw the limit. They most likely reached the limit fairly soon after making the items available. Seriously, if you are going to do something like that, don't put limits on it. So they lost out on my additional purchases and the charity got nothing. SOE probably spends a fraction of that amount on just one airing of their FR commercials, so it hardly seems all that much better than AO's greedy attempt to profit off of charity.
Reply

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 3:18PM CCon99 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The way I read it, they were only going to match the donations up to $50,000. After that point they would still give all the money earned from the $5 purchases to the charity, they just wouldn't offer the $10 donation for every $5 purchase after the $50,000 limit was reached.

$50k is still a hefty donation, for once I'll let SOE slide on the negative comment. =P
Reply

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 6:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I doubt they will sell 5000 of those cute little red and green dinos to hit the $50,000 cap. I bought one, and have seen a few others in game. The cash shop items that are limited to 1,000 sales havn't sold out.
Reply

Posted: Jan 1st 2010 12:20PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe I misread that then? If the $5 still goes to the charity then I'll go ahead and get the charity dino and also get one of the dragons. Maybe one of the deer too.
Reply

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 11:54AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't play this but it seems to me that upfront honesty would have saved the day. If they stated 5% goes to charity as part of the banner headline and been completely upfront about it then it would be no big deal - just a nice little bonus to spending money

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 12:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow... This is really low.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 1:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I could understand the 5% if they weren't charging much for the item but they were charging nearly 40 bucks. They should of offered atleast 25 - 50% regardless if the box had tons of rares.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 1:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
My fiancé and I knew that sounded like too much of a scam. Who would not announce the percentages of their donations off a charity of an item, unless they had something to hide? It's like those "pink ribbon" products, where some companies give away pennies on the dollar from their products.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 1:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, 40 bucks and only 2 bucks of that goes to charity?

Not even Blizzard went that low with their Pandaren Monk thing.

Posted: Dec 31st 2009 10:53PM Crazeman said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Wow that's just a ****ed up attitude to take. If AO really cared about donating, they should of gladly took off Child's Play's links/logos/etc and still give donate the measly 5%.

In that case, people who actually buy the item, actually brought it because they want the item, and AO gets to do something nice for the holidays and contribute to child's play. AO is a decent f2p game, but their stance and attitude are just messed up.

Posted: Jan 1st 2010 7:26AM BaronJuJu said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't blame Child's Play from pulling out, thats b****hit. I'm glad to see others such as SOE and Wizard 101 taking it more seriously. My real hope is to see more and more MMO companies take part in these holiday events for Childs Play, it is a great cause.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW