Just realized that GameMaker is owned by a gambling company

While I was loading in GMS2, I saw that both YoYoGames is owned by Playtech PLC, a huge gambling company.

I'm disappointed, and I kinda wish I didn't buy it. I don't like supporting gambling companies.

What do all of ye think of this?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Same as you. Should've followed my gut on that one. Playtech is right up there with tobacco companies and payday loan sharks, i.e., exploitation for profit. It's hard to believe that Playtech's corporate MO---bleed the customers---is completely separate from YYG's overarching decision to monetize GMS through one-shot sales, followed by terrible support, rather than choosing a cooperative marketplace, ad, publishing, subscription, or revenue share model like other for-profit engines not owned by gambling companies.
 

Pfap

Member
I think there are some interesting points made here, but feel that the video game industry itself has some less than completely honest issues too. I suppose it is the reason "shovel ware" is a term. Although, most for profit company's are interested in profit over most other things... kind of wish Richard Branson would release a well supported game engine, lol.
 
I think there are some interesting points made here, but feel that the video game industry itself has some less than completely honest issues too. I suppose it is the reason "shovel ware" is a term. Although, most for profit company's are interested in profit over most other things... kind of wish Richard Branson would release a well supported game engine, lol.
I mean, he owns <400 companies, what's one more?
 
Nintendo started off making playing cards that are often used for gambling. In fact they still manufacture those cards. :D
Hanafuda cards were often used for gambling... by Japanese organized crime -- even more unsavory. IIRC Nintendo founder Fusajiro Yamauchi frequented such parlors and sold his handmade cards while they were still illegal. They also made some forays into the sex industry with adult-themed "nude cards" and love hotels. The area the original Nintendo Playing Card Co. building was in still houses many yakuza strongholds to this day.

Honestly, you're going to end up avoiding a lot of games if you're avoiding anything owned by companies that had or have a hand in gambling. SEGA (Standard Games) was created to put slot machines and other coin-op gambling products in Hawaii. They still own a huge share in the pachinko industry. Konami has a massive share in the JP gambling industry as well.
 
Same as you. Should've followed my gut on that one. Playtech is right up there with tobacco companies and payday loan sharks, i.e., exploitation for profit. It's hard to believe that Playtech's corporate MO---bleed the customers---is completely separate from YYG's overarching decision to monetize GMS through one-shot sales, followed by terrible support, rather than choosing a cooperative marketplace, ad, publishing, subscription, or revenue share model like other for-profit engines not owned by gambling companies.
GameMaker is so unlike anything else they own, and they bought it for tons of cash. Subscription might be the future though, there's already a subscription model and theyjust didn't want to anger the customers (yet).
 
Hanafuda cards were often used for gambling... by Japanese organized crime -- even more unsavory. IIRC Nintendo founder Fusajiro Yamauchi frequented such parlors and sold his handmade cards while they were still illegal. They also made some forays into the sex industry with adult-themed "nude cards" and love hotels. The area the original Nintendo Playing Card Co. building was in still houses many yakuza strongholds to this day.

Honestly, you're going to end up avoiding a lot of games if you're avoiding anything owned by companies that had or have a hand in gambling. SEGA (Standard Games) was created to put slot machines and other coin-op gambling products in Hawaii. They still own a huge share in the pachinko industry. Konami has a massive share in the JP gambling industry as well.
I still don't like the idea though...The company is huge and still leeching people's money...
 

rIKmAN

Member
cooperative marketplace
Whilst it isn't the biggest or best, they do have a marketplace that is integrated with the IDE and takes the industry standard 30% cut.
How else would you like it to be?
publishing
They tried this and then a year later shut it down.
GMS2 isn't Unity or Unreal and won't ever be, so they will never make money in the same diverse ways that those companies can and do.
subscription, or revenue share model like other for-profit engines not owned by gambling companies.
You would really prefer a monthly subscription or percentage of profit made over a one time payment?
 
I meant leeching off gamblers.

Is GameMaker really that unproftable?
Unfortunately, it's just a theory based off of GM's sales model vs. the competition, GMC's active size vs. competitor communities' sizes, and subjective experience with GM's general reputation and usage percentage in other game development communities. I have no hard numbers for any of this.
 
G

Guest

Guest
You would really prefer a monthly subscription or percentage of profit made over a one time payment?
Absolutely. Then everyone would've dropped their mobile subscriptions and forced YYG to choose between supporting it or just not selling it. I get the hate for subscriptions more generally (I guess), but haven't we learned that YYG badly needs some kind of accountability?
 

JeffJ

Member
Absolutely. Then everyone would've dropped their mobile subscriptions and forced YYG to choose between supporting it or just not selling it. I get the hate for subscriptions more generally (I guess), but haven't we learned that YYG badly needs some kind of accountability?
Eh... Speaking as someone who pays the annual $1500 for the Ultimate package, that doesn't seem to help. In any regard, actually.
 
L

Lonewolff

Guest
I still don't like the idea though...The company is huge and still leeching people's money...
They have been putting money into my back account for several years. My only source of dev income has been direct from YYG themselves and I am not even an employee.

Wonder if they realise? :D
 

Toque

Member
Same as you. Should've followed my gut on that one. Playtech is right up there with tobacco companies and payday loan sharks, i.e., exploitation for profit. It's hard to believe that Playtech's corporate MO---bleed the customers---is completely separate from YYG's overarching decision to monetize GMS through one-shot sales, followed by terrible support, rather than choosing a cooperative marketplace, ad, publishing, subscription, or revenue share model like other for-profit engines not owned by gambling companies.
Ethics and business is a interesting topic. I think if you go deep into most companies they have aspects you may not like.

I prefer open business models. I’ve used payday loans. There was no deceit. This is what we will do. This is the cost.

Smoking was murky. There was deceit. Now everything is obvious. These are the risks/ costs to play.

Gambling. These are the odds. We always slant to our favor. Don’t play if you don’t want to pay us.

I think children should be protected. I think deceit should be punished.
 

Mert

Member
If you seek morale or ethics, I have a bad news for you mate: The very computer and phone you own were made by 9 years old slave children.
Maybe you should throw away your iPhone..

Edit : It's better that Yoyogames is not alone in the business.
 
Last edited:
A

Andy

Guest
It's great that you're thinking about how what you buy effects others.
But, the system most of us live under today is unethical. There is little (if any) ethical consumption.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Toque

Member
If you seek morale or ethics, I have a bad news for you mate: The very computer and phone you own were made by 9 years old slave children.
Maybe you should throw away your iPhone..
If you look deep enough your probably right.

The parts and raw material mining are murky.

It’s ok to have a moral stick to judge. But will you apply it every software you use and go down that rabbit hole ???
 
Last edited:

Toque

Member
This descended into moral nihilism pretty quickly.
I would expect nothing less. There are many different people here.

I do respect your position and reasoning. It’s completely valid. It’s just I don’t share it about gambling.

It’s an interesting subject for sure.
 
N

Nathan Archer

Guest
Nintendo started off making playing cards that are often used for gambling. In fact they still manufacture those cards. :D
Trading cards are pretty much gambling. You pay X amount for a booster pack to get something of Y amount in value which may be lower or higher than X amount. It's a slot machine.
 

Nocturne

Friendly Tyrant
Forum Staff
Admin
People are unhappy that YYG has a hands-off parent company that is involved (openly and legally) in gambling, yet I don't see anyone here talking about the underhanded and hidden gambling that is being done by GAMES companies (I'm looking at you EA): https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/21/loot...ld-gambling-problem-reveals-uk-study-8164308/

Maybe YYG should put loot boxes into GMS? Pay a few dollars and maybe win a cool sprite, or a new script, or even a 1 month export licence for Android! Hmmm... I think I need a meeting with management ASAP...
 

ElectroMan

Jack of All Shades
I see a lot of tu quoque fallacies being thrown around here, and it really isn't an argument. That's just a form of ad hominem, in which the insult is "hypocrite." For a crash course on that fallacy, the argument reads as:
You're complaining about this, but you also promote that in some other way, therefore you're a hypocrite, therefore you're wrong.
Which if you cut out the fat, becomes:
You're a hypocrite therefore you're wrong.
Obviously it's a malformed argument. I'm not taking sides though. In any sense, as long as it's something that is legal, I don't see how you should be suspicious about a company's "ethical alignment," if that even is a thing. Companies are good at finding market "exploits" to gain the most profit, that's what they do. And unless that doesn't go against anti-trust laws, who cares. Now if you talk about outsourcing child labour, that's a humans rights issue and is completely separable from that discussion. In that case, "legal" doesn't mean "ethical" in a broader sense.
 

woodsmoke

Member
Gambling is a game so it kind of fits. Just don't make gambling games that compete with playtech or we are doomed! ;)

@True Valhalla care to elaborate? Is it because Yoyo is financially secure now?
 

Ihato

Member
I see a lot of tu quoque fallacies being thrown around here,
And here's another one thrown a lot around in the thread: begging the question.
Don't worry. Playtech isn't making a profit from YoYo Games
Playtech acquiring YoYo Games is probably one of the best things to happen to GameMaker.
Apparently we're supposed to take these at face value and shut up. Seriously, would it hurt you to lead up with "because..." and NOT finish the sentence point blank? I, for one, don't know why it isn't making profit and why it's the best thing for YYG.

I don't see how you should be suspicious about a company's "ethical alignment," if that even is a thing.
Well, it kinda is a thing. Most recent example I can think of (fairly benign) is how they shrunk Tifa's bust in Final Fantasy 7 because the company's ethical department told them to. I think companies nowadays don't want to be viewed as just faceless money-making machines. They want to assume an ethical stance and convince you their values align with yours (that is what Pepsi, Nike and Gillette ads tried to). So nowadays, some companies do hold 'ethical values' you can support or not.

Regardless however, you could always decide against supporting a company based on what it does alone, and it's not "who cares". Perhaps you lost your father to alcoholism and your mother's addiction to gambling rendered your family homeless so you don't want to do anything to support those two. Just like you said 'legal' doesn't mean 'ethical' in broader sense when it comes to child labor, you can say the same for gambling.
 
I see a lot of tu quoque fallacies being thrown around here, and it really isn't an argument. That's just a form of ad hominem, in which the insult is "hypocrite."
Smells like a potential case of fallacy fallacy to me ;)

Don't get me wrong, I agree almost entirely with the rest of your comment, but basing the entirety of your rebuke to nobody in particular on fallacy lawyering is just an easy way to get the psuedo-intellectual version of "no u" thrown at you. It isn't the best way to encourage positive discussion. In most cases, you're better off picking apart weak individual arguments than name-dropping a fallacy and dropping the mic.
 
Last edited:
A

Andy

Guest
Companies are good at finding market "exploits" to gain the most profit, that's what they do.
I agree with this.

Playtech doesn't seem completely irresponsible:
https://www.sbcnews.co.uk/technolog...onsible-gambling-solutions-provider-betbuddy/
I don’t trust markets to self-regulate, but the seeming willingness to accept regulation is nice.
Funding the creation of software to prevent irresponsible gambling could help a lot of people (depending on how it’s used of course).

After thinking about it more, I don’t necessarily view gambling itself as unethical.
I view unregulated gambling, within a society that doesn't provide addiction prevention programs, unethical. Companies exploiting people and irresponsible gambling are symptoms. These problems will go away if society changes the system (hopefully slowly over time and in a sustainable way).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Toque

Member
I thought the discussion was pretty civil compared to most off topic forum discussions that go down the rabbit hole.


"What do you all think?" Is a pretty broad and various directions should be expected.
The original poster doesn't like supporting gambling companies. Thats completely valid. I dont think anyone thinks his feelings are wrong.

If there are errors in logic or argument thats fine. No discussions are perfect.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Smells like a potential case of fallacy fallacy to me ;)

Don't get me wrong, I agree almost entirely with the rest of your comment, but basing the entirety of your rebuke to nobody in particular on fallacy lawyering is just an easy way to get the psuedo-intellectual version of "no u" thrown at you. It isn't the best way to encourage positive discussion. In most cases, you're better off picking apart weak individual arguments than name-dropping a fallacy and dropping the mic.
I enjoyed learning the name of the fallacy! I knew there was an issue along the lines of "because you also do X unethical behavior, therefore you can't say Y is unethical," but I was leaning more towards some kind of "moral nihilism / nothing is moral / your premises are naive" thing. @ElectroMan provided a more precise label and analysis. I don't like internet debate, and I'm not really a philosophy/debate club guy myself, but I enjoy learning these things.
 
I enjoyed learning the name of the fallacy! I knew there was an issue along the lines of "because you also do X unethical behavior, therefore you can't say Y is unethical," but I was leaning more towards some kind of "moral nihilism / nothing is moral / your premises are naive" thing. @ElectroMan provided a more precise label and analysis. I don't like internet debate, and I'm not really a philosophy/debate club guy myself, but I enjoy learning these things.
I was probably just preemptively overreacting a bit; sorry. People tend to get far too emotionally involved quickly on this topic. I do want to bring out though, that "because you also do X unethical behavior, therefore you can't say Y is unethical" is vastly different from "because you support X unethical behavior, you have no right to complain about X being unethical." The latter seems to be more what those criticizing OP are doing.

What level of distance you have to be to no longer consider yourself "supporting" something is an argument people can have forever.
 

Toque

Member
I was probably just preemptively overreacting a bit; sorry. People tend to get far too emotionally involved quickly on this topic. I do want to bring out though, that "because you also do X unethical behavior, therefore you can't say Y is unethical" is vastly different from "because you support X unethical behavior, you have no right to complain about X being unethical." The latter seems to be more what those criticizing OP are doing.

What level of distance you have to be to no longer consider yourself "supporting" something is an argument people can have forever.

That makes sense. I think more specific examples related to the discussion would help.

But what exactly does the OP want to discuss then? Could they ask a more specific question? Bring it back to the desired topic. If the OP doesn't want to guide the discussion (thats totally cool too) then its out in the wild.

Business ethics?
The morality of gambling?
A poll on the level support on his/her position? agree or disagree.
Influence of a gambling company on YYC?
Just want to make people aware of the gambling connection?

I might just pass on the discussion. I had never considered the gambling- YYC connection so I thought it was interesting.

Thanks OP for posting and brining it up.
 
A

Andy

Guest
I might just pass on the discussion. I had never considered the gambling- YYC connection so I thought it was interesting.
Same.
I don’t know much about Playtech, and I keep going back and forth over the morality of gambling in my mind.
I don’t want to get stuck defending a position which I am unsure of myself (if this makes sense).
 

FrostyCat

Redemption Seeker
I simply do not understand the spineless "I think this, I think that" virtue-signaling that's going on in this topic. If you don't want to support GMS 2 because it is owned by a company with gambling as its main source of income, then don't buy it. Simple as that. Don't think and feel, ACT.

I'm not a particularly religious person myself, but I think you guys should take a hint from Islamic funds. If you think the asset has turned unclean, divest from it, donate the proceeds and move on. Show some spine and take decisive action, even if it's just your own spine to show and your own action to take.

One of the things I hate about people of my age is how they constantly virtue-signal, but trepidate publicly as soon as they have to put their money where their mouth is. If the Bolsheviks acted the same way, instead of robbing the Bank of Tiflis they'd just write editorials asking if someone should rob the Bank of Tiflis for them.
 
A

Andy

Guest
Good. Signaling virtue literally goes hand in hand with direct action. It helps inspire, build solidarity, and forward causes.
Self-expression and demonstration are part of protest. Discounting people as "virtue-signaling" is simply a way to counter protest with discouragement.
 

chance

predictably random
Forum Staff
Moderator
I simply do not understand the spineless "I think this, I think that" virtue-signaling.
Reminds me of my favorite Gilbert and Sullivan opera: The Mikado. A great spoof of British politics of that era.
POOH-BAH (Spoken) Our logical Mikado (Emperor) seeing no moral difference between the dignified judge that condemns a criminal to die, and the industrious mechanic who carries out the sentence...
In other words, it is sufficient to simply say "off with his head", without actually carrying out the sentence. Because when the emperor condemns a person, he's "as good as dead". So no need for further action.

It's brilliant satire. And still relevant today.
 
While I was loading in GMS2, I saw that both YoYoGames is owned by Playtech PLC, a huge gambling company.

I'm disappointed, and I kinda wish I didn't buy it. I don't like supporting gambling companies.

What do all of ye think of this?
Personally, I wouldn't worry about it.

For instance, Bally Midway is known for its 1980's standup arcade game called Spy Hunter, but they're also known for producing one arm bandit machines ( or slot machines ) that are used in casinos for places like Las Vegas, NV.
 
W

Wigfrid

Guest
Hmm I really do hope @Nocturne doesn't close this down as this is very interesting to see many different insights here..
 
W

Wigfrid

Guest
If you seek morale or ethics, I have a bad news for you mate: The very computer and phone you own were made by 9 years old slave children.
Maybe you should throw away your iPhone..
You really missed the point here bud, nobody was aiming for perfection as such. On your case, there is absolutely nothing we can do about. With to-buy-GM or not, there is. Play your hand on your turn and do your best.
 

Jabbers

Member
Subscription might be the future though, there's already a subscription model and theyjust didn't want to anger the customers (yet).
People have been saying this for years. Hasn't happened yet, even with the release of GMS2 which would have been a good place to start implementing one. It could happen in the future, but it needn't worry you now.
 
C

CombatCalamity

Guest
People have been saying this for years. Hasn't happened yet, even with the release of GMS2 which would have been a good place to start implementing one. It could happen in the future, but it needn't worry you now.
It's already happening. Today, you can't have console export without paying yearly. At $1500 a year to have all export, it costs as much as Unity Pro which is waaay more solid and packs more features. There's a reason why it's so widely used in the (indie) industry.
 
N

NeZvers

Guest
I simply don't give a damn who is owned by who. All I care about is the product I get - does it do what it should do. I'm only disappointed about GMS:1.4 -> GMS:2 migration, since I have to buy export licenses again without reduced price.
 

Roa

Member
Nintendo started off making playing cards that are often used for gambling. In fact they still manufacture those cards. :D
they started off making toys and games in general, cards are just one thing. That's why all their consoles and games are filled with gimmicks, its their roots trying to show through. Whether people choose to real life gamble on them is in their hands. Nintendo didn't make them do that.

People are unhappy that YYG has a hands-off parent company that is involved (openly and legally) in gambling, yet I don't see anyone here talking about the underhanded and hidden gambling that is being done by GAMES companies (I'm looking at you EA): https://metro.co.uk/2018/11/21/loot...ld-gambling-problem-reveals-uk-study-8164308/

Maybe YYG should put loot boxes into GMS? Pay a few dollars and maybe win a cool sprite, or a new script, or even a 1 month export licence for Android! Hmmm... I think I need a meeting with management ASAP...
Christ, can you slam the gavel on the nail any harder @Nocturne ? lmao.
Playtech acquiring YoYo Games is probably one of the best things to happen to GameMaker.
THIS! ^ If you don't like gambling, then what ever. But playtech is playtech and yoyo is yoyo, regardless of who bought what subsidiaries. They are still independent companies doing their own thing. Yoyo just gets the monitary support of having a buyer, which has clearly shown to be good for everyone, Yoyo and its users.

Everything we have in the game maker studio lineup is in large part thanks to playtech. They, along with yoyo's hard work have turned it from a tinker toy to a full industry product people can use.
Don't worry. Playtech isn't making a profit from YoYo Games. ;)
lol, the shade.
It's already happening. Today, you can't have console export without paying yearly. At $1500 a year to have all export, it costs as much as Unity Pro which is waaay more solid and packs more features. There's a reason why it's so widely used in the (indie) industry.
Then go buy unity and be successful. Also, I'd say as an avid user of both engines, I would not describe unity as "solid" by any measure lmao. Unity breaks more 💩💩💩💩 year by year than yoyo's HTML5 module will ever get a chance at. But chances are, if your game is reaching console. 1500 a year is a drop in the bucket for an export and dedicated support.
 
L

Lonewolff

Guest
Maybe YYG should put loot boxes into GMS? Pay a few dollars and maybe win a cool sprite, or a new script, or even a 1 month export licence for Android! Hmmm... I think I need a meeting with management ASAP...
I like it! :D
 
Top