Gems for a Good Cause

Has ANET ever sold Limited Edition Gems for a good cause? Maybe Gems that are worth 10-25% more value than the standard Gems. Have them open for only seven days or so.

Since it is a global company, gaming people around the world could help disasters as they arise. It would cause a hiccup in the gaming economy, but it wouldn't be something done every month, maybe two or three times a year max.

Think of the Goodwill ANET and the gaming community as a whole would get out of helping others.

I won't go into what makes a disaster and what doesn't, but it's just a thought.

@"Game of Bones.8975" said:

I won't go into what makes a disaster and what doesn't, but it's just a thought.

Which is why companies usually are very picky with these actions.Should we donate to starving children or the victims of a natural desaster? Are refugees of war more deserving of our goodwill/consolation cash or are victims of domestic violence? Should we save the rain forest or the oceans? Is a disaster in the US more or less deserving than a desaster in Australia? Should we support a children's education program or a program that helps drug addicts and their families? And why not both/everything?

Also, If you set it to "maybe three times a year" you are expecting at least three desasters worthy of our pity cash. What if we had our three rallies already and something even worse happens? What if it's the beginning of december but we rallied only once so far? And of course, why stop at three, why not four, five or more?

Charity is businesmodel in itself and most companies don't mix well with it. Not saying it's a bad idea but there are reasons why things like this don't happen very often.

I just read that Zynga does it and wondered if ANet ever had something like this.

I remember Anet doing some charity but it worked differently than gem sales I believe.

If ArenaNet were doing a charity drive then I'd prefer them to create and sell skins or minis for real world currency not gems and giving the proceeds to the charity.

Selling gems cheaper for charity doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

@Pifil.5193 said:If ArenaNet were doing a charity drive then I'd prefer them to create and sell skins or minis for real world currency not gems and giving the proceeds to the charity.

> Selling gems cheaper for charity doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

He said 10-25% higher than normal gems. Not discounted.

@Loosmaster.8263 said:

@"Pifil.5193" said:If ArenaNet were doing a charity drive then I'd prefer them to create and sell skins or minis for real world currency not gems and giving the proceeds to the charity.

> Selling gems cheaper for charity doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

"Gems worth more" is essentially a cheaper cost for Gems, I believe.

I know players have done charity events in-game, which include raising money via incentives (like everyone who donates $10 or more is entered into a draw to win in-game items). Pink Day in LA is probably the most well known one, but there's others too.

I don't think Anet has ever done anything like that though. I believe they have held their own charity drives and events for staff, but that's quite different.

I can tell you from personal experience that these types of corporate tie-ins can and do happen, but they take a lot of planning, even once a cause and a charity has been chosen. Given Anet's recently...experience....with tie-in promotions I think they'll be wary of trying anything like that any time soon.

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Loosmaster.8263 said:

@"Pifil.5193" said:If ArenaNet were doing a charity drive then I'd prefer them to create and sell skins or minis for real world currency not gems and giving the proceeds to the charity.

> Selling gems cheaper for charity doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Yep, basically.

@Pifil.5193 said:

@Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

@Loosmaster.8263 said:

@Pifil.5193 said:If ArenaNet were doing a charity drive then I'd prefer them to create and sell skins or minis for real world currency not gems and giving the proceeds to the charity.

> Selling gems cheaper for charity doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

Guess I'm seeing something different. I thought he was asking for higher priced gems. Where the 10-25% increase would go to the donation.

GW could sell a special small item for Pink Day in LA. Maybe a special balloon, dye, tonic, or mini? It would be so awesome if they would sell a special pink choya pinata mini for pink day in LA! :)

@"brenda.9723" said:GW could sell a special small item for Pink Day in LA. Maybe a special balloon, dye, tonic, or mini? It would be so awesome if they would sell a special pink choya pinata mini for pink day in LA! :)

Why dont people ever talk about blue day, men die of prostate cancer too.Just checked and even I dident know its this month even =)

https://www.pcf.org/blue/

@Linken.6345 said:

@"brenda.9723" said:GW could sell a special small item for Pink Day in LA. Maybe a special balloon, dye, tonic, or mini? It would be so awesome if they would sell a special pink choya pinata mini for pink day in LA! :)

Movember is pretty big every years.As to why there's nothing in GW for it, it's probably because most people prefer asking why no one do anything instead of starting something, I guess.Movember would be harder to organize in GW2 than Pink day in LA since it technically automatically exclude all female characters because they cannot have a mustache or bread. Unless Anet was to make some beard or fancy mustache helmet skin that is also usable by female characters. But maybe with a little bit of organization, they would. Like when they made a pink dye in GW1.

Theres also the risk of back lash whenever any kind of charity cause comes up. I remember Cloud Imperium did a "Veterans day" $5 skin charity promotion, where all the proceeds were donated to Veterans Charities; including one that helped pay for surviving vets to visit DC war memorials. Many of the non-US players immediately backlashed because it related the US military, and there were even accusations of the company "openly supporting war crimes", "asking victims to pay for it", "and dragging in real world politics into the game". The next 2 days on the forums were a total shit show. But weaved inbetween that was a discussion about "what qualifies as a charity?", and the roundabout debate that arose showed how paradoxical an international audience is when it comes to determining "what charities deserve to exist". And yes, that last quote was presented as a serious argument. But perhaps what was most insane about the forum blow up is how many people who were firming against the charity in question, still wanted the Skin, and was willing to pay for it as long none of the money went to the intended charities.

The Mercy Skin in Overwatch on the other hadn was a resounding success........ except for that thing with Sony. But it goes to show the type of charity being supported can be a powder keg on the PR side, just as much as the logistics and legal can be on the Accounting side. If your player base has ANY kind of bias (and its guaranteed to have one), something as seemingly uncontroversial as "Human aid" can quickly devolve into disaster if any kind of political line can be implied from it..... like sending Aid to Africa vs Aid to Tibet. And if you don't understand why Tibet would turn into a total shit show, look up its history with China, and then look up how China's entertainment industry works on anyone wanting to tap into its market. Or just compare characters in Dr Strange the comic to Dr Strange the Movie.

Now thats just the problems involved in picking a charity. Next you have to consider the state of the player base. Are in they a good enough mood to not turn on you? How much conspiracy theory can be generated that can't be easily debunked (such as Allocation of Dev resources not being put into more useful game development)? Can it be even "perceived" to create a disparity in the game? How to deal with players that might disagree with it? Especially if lines can be drawn to political topics (which seems nearly impossible today, given quickly you can 7 degrees link anything to anything)?. Because even with the Japan earthquake disaster, there were people fighting against the idea of charity aid because of the resulting Nuclear power plant leak. Or a charity organization becomes a controversy. Or just people trying to infer a charity is bad because it supports X. And in the case of international businesses, which charity gets to have a fund raising event, while others are getting ignored?

Another thing might happen soon is apathy among gamers. Seeing how they normally respond whenever they get bombarded with something that vies for their attention, theres also the real risk of "Charity burn out". The mere saturation of 2-3 charities a month (cumulative across their daily life) starts to rob it of that "fuzzy feeling" that charities tend to rely on drive participation; as it leads to the realization that the onslaught of contributions are NOT making enough of a difference to matter. This is why small, focused charities are often easier to pitch.... a simple mission, with easily attainable goals. Bigger organizations are inherently more complicated, and have much greater overhead... which shifts the perception of the organization from Grass Roots to Corporate. And that shift has been something often brought into question when it comes to potential corruption, skimming, embezzlement, and even the personal lives of the administration staff. An organization headed by a CEO, who has millions in personal funds, decides to take a vacation, rents a Yacht and someone posts a picture of it (doesn't even have to be anyone who was party to it, and just some fisherman that saw and recognized him). Within a couple of days, a twitter storm erupts as the picture gets passed around. And before anyone realizes its happening, news outlets are now latching on to a "story" about how the "CEO is suspected of using Charity funds to pay for an expensive weekend get away for himself and friends". I made that story up, and I'm willing to bet at least half you were trying to remember if you heard of it before or not.

And while I don't think its necessary to point out that I'm not saying charities are bad..... I feel I need to point it out anyway, because the thought process that could lead to conclusion that I'm against companies doing charities is pretty much the same thought process that leads to the above situation where everyone (even unconsciously) is now running mental gymnastics to extract implications where none might exist, and becomes the fuel that enflames a controversy. ...... you know what... I change my position; its totally fucking necessary to point this out in every conversation, because when I don't repeat it, implications get free reign.

TLDR; Ingredients: Peanuts - (May contain Nuts).

I think Anet is best to stay out of this. If you want to donate to a good cause, you don't need to buy gems just donate directly.

@starlinvf.1358 said:Theres also the risk of back lash whenever any kind of charity cause comes up.

That is a problem. I can think of at least half a dozen charities that are the first place that people want to send money to on a given topic that have a LARGE number of detractors among the people that know more than average about a topic. If a company is not directly connected to the issue than if they want to help the best thing is to publicise the problem (not even link to potential charities as everyone will give to the first one).

Another game I play gave a special cosmetic & a few other items to raise money for a little girl with an extremely rare disease. The community tended to be anti spending money on the game but for this it seemed everyone was sporting the exclusive cosmetic. It was fun & seemed to bring the community together for a good cause.

You just have to know your playerbase. Pink day in LA is organized by the community, so the community already supports this charity. If you suddenly put something in the gemstore, when ppl dont understand the context, then there can be a bad reaction. I think ppl are a little bit to afraid on this forum for charity.

@lokh.2695 said:

@"Game of Bones.8975" said:

I won't go into what makes a disaster and what doesn't, but it's just a thought.

Wait so because you can’t choose whom to help you choose to not help at all? It doesn’t matter who you decide to help there is no ‘they deserve more help than the other‘. You choose the one that’s somehow closer to your heart, but just to choose not to help so nobody feels left out is super dumb.Thinking like this doesn’t justify not helping.Nobody is gonna complain that you are helping the starving children in Africa and not the rain forest or anything.

@Dashingsteel.3410 said:I think Anet is best to stay out of this. If you want to donate to a good cause, you don't need to buy gems just donate directly.

I agree with this. I'd always rather donate directly as then I get to make sure my money goes to the cause/relief effect etc of my choice, and then select the charity for that cause who I believe will distribute/utilise the donations in the most effective way to help.

@Nash.3974 said:

@lokh.2695 said:

@"Game of Bones.8975" said:

I won't go into what makes a disaster and what doesn't, but it's just a thought.

I think the issue (or at least in my case), is having a limited income allows little spare each month for purchases and donations, so what little I can donate I'd rather have a choice of which charities I donate it to. It's not a case of choosing not to help, its a case of if I had to pay more for gems as the extra is donated to a random charity, then I'd rather just buy gems at the normal rate and put the extra it would have cost towards a charity/cause which I prioritise more. Also I then could choose the charity which I think will distribute the donations to the cause in the most effective way.

the thing about corporations doing events like this is that either the community started it and they want to capitalize on it or they're trying to convinse ppl that they aren't run by sauron and rudolf shmitler.

@Nash.3974 said:

@lokh.2695 said:

@"Game of Bones.8975" said:

I won't go into what makes a disaster and what doesn't, but it's just a thought.

As an individual, I can chose whom to help and do so by helping that which is closest to my heart, you're right. But as a company that has to cater to a plethora of individuals this decission is much harder. All I said is that it's a difficult decision for a company to make. When I chose to help starving children over helping the victims of domestic violence no one will call me out on it. For a company this is different, especially in the time we live in now, where nuanced opinions are a thing of the past. Much like your answer, that goes full on "so wait you chose to help noone because you can't make up your mind, how stupid is that!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?" where I haven't said anything along those lines.

Sadly some people really will assume that if you support one cause, even as an individual, it means you don't care about any others. I work for a wildlife conservation charity and on (thankfully rare) occasions I've literally been asked if that means I don't care about people. Apparently what I'm good at and qualified to do doesn't come into it (I thought that's what determines most people's jobs, but whatever) and the fact that the people asking me are usually working for whatever corporation is nearby and/or pays well and don't consider it anything more than a way to make money doesn't change their right to judge my choices.

When it's my personal choice I don't think it's worth arguing. But when it's a company, and especially when you're encouraging other people to support a cause you've chosen I think you do need to be prepared to explain why you picked that one. Which is entirely possible, but it does make it more difficult, particularly when the people answering may not be the ones who made the decision.

And yeah, an international audience makes it much more difficult because the legalities and definitions vary, as well as expectations of how charitable work will be handled. For example in the UK I can safely say 'charity' and assume everyone knows I mean a not-for-profit organisation almost certainly registered with the Charity Commission, whereas apparently in the USA there is such a thing as for-profit charities, so the term non-profit is more commonly used to refer to those who actually raise money for their cause and not for their owners.

@Haishao.6851 said:

@Linken.6345 said:

@"brenda.9723" said:GW could sell a special small item for Pink Day in LA. Maybe a special balloon, dye, tonic, or mini? It would be so awesome if they would sell a special pink choya pinata mini for pink day in LA! :)

If I remember correctly the people who started Pink Day in LA did it because the cause was important to them personally - they'd all lost people to breast cancer. The fact that it took off is down to the work they put into it and making it a genuinely fun and meaningful event for players to participate in. There's a few others community fundraisers which have been set up by different people for other causes.

There's nothing stopping someone from setting up one for prostate cancer, or any other cause that's important to them.

Yes, it would be nice to get some extra value every now and again and no, it wouldn't mess up the economy because that would imply that it is functional right now and if you think that... Well, excuse me while I point and you and laugh...