Ross Scott

I realize twitch isn't ideal, but this is going to be a logistics nightmare with the communication, so maybe there can be intermediaries relaying what I say to the right people. At least with twitch, EVERYONE can access it if they need to (or just want to watch). Plus some people could keep twitch off most of the time, then turn it on if they want to see my location. I'm trying to figure that out now, but I definitely don't want to be the one running it. It would be better to hand that off to someone more experienced with new players. I would be fine with them operating independent of me also, though having some sort of communication pathway to the outfit would be helpful as well. There are multiple tiers I'm envisioning for this: 1. Brand new players who barely got through the tutorial (I don't expect them to join squads or outfits, that's why I was emphasizing autonomy in the tutorial) 2. Beginning to intermediate players who want more organization (this is who we'll want an official outfit for) 3. Advanced players (these people should operate independent from me as they see fit). I've gotten a couple emails about possibilities also, but let's try and decide on an official one before the next videochat on May 1st if we can, I can announce it then that way. I was aiming for as SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. I don't expect brand new players to even use the minimap necessarily.

This was the hardest dilemma and is part of why I took so long to make this video. You see there's a conundrum in Planetside 2. Asking a brand new player to learn much more than what I conveyed in the video might put them at the threshold of not wanting to play the game, this is why I was trying to focus on self-autonomy. This is also why I think liaisons will be needed. Hopefully there can be people involved in different communities in communication with me that can spread the word out if I have any big announcements (I don't plan on dictating much, mostly what base I'm heading too next and any I would suggest splitting off into). I want any competent players to be acting independent of me. On the contrary, since I'll be streaming, I'll be a walking liability in terms of intelligence. Any sensitive strategic action should NOT be communicated to me. Yes of course, I just didn't want brand new players to feel like that was mandatory. Maybe forming an official rookie outfit "for those that want extra training" might be a good idea.

Yeah sorry man, it USED to support both, though I guess you could argue this is a game that really could use the extra RAM. Just email me about that. I don't know how many I can take, but the idea is I would need someone who could handle me talking frequently to keep the stream more watchable for people, but could communciate any major issues or suggestions unfolding if they arise (either in-game or on twitch). I wasn't planning on it. The idea behind all this is I don't want new people feeling excluded. The more experienced you get with a squad, the more it becomes more of a "in" group. And I want people who are struggling to learn the rest of the game to be able to join in. And other people can absolutely play it the way they want to. I think we'll be more effective letting existing / experienced players handle things in their own way rather than follow me into any bad decision I may make. Yeah I hope a lot of people do what you're talking about while my group acts as more of a meat shield.

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » Join me in Planetside 2! I originally planned to have this video out a couple weeks ago, but as usual for me, better late than never. Besides giving a rundown on what this is all about and relevant information, I also included a tutorial for people who have never played Planetside 2 before. I hope we get a large volume of people and things don't melt down. In case you miss it, the game will start on May 15th, at 2pm EST on the Emerald Server. It will also be livestreamed at twitch.tv/rossbroadcast. The next videos will be a little slow to come out (besides the monthly videochat), but I'm working to get all kinds of stuff coming in the future. In the meantime, I'll see some of you in Planetside! EDIT: I made two important mistakes in the video! 1. There is an easier way to get to some battles! You can "serial spawn" where you repeatedly spawn closer and closer to the base you want, waiting 10 seconds in between. I didn't know that! 2. Each base DOES have a vehicle terminal, but some may need an engineer to repair them. Something else I didn't know. COMMENTS

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » I forgot to mention in the last videochat the date of the next one. In general I'm doing it on the first Sunday of each month, so the next will be in about a week on May 1st, at 4pm EST at twitch.tv/rossbroadcast. You can leave additional questions or topics you'd like me to try to cover here in the comments below. I plan on discussing the Nostalrius server incident some in the beginning also. In other news, the Planetside 2 recruitment video is getting close to being finished, I'm guessing 2 days maximum. I was hoping to have it done by now, but the tutorial got more involved than I planned and I wanted to make sure people won't be lost. After that, my time will be split multiple ways between catching up on emails, getting other projects slowly prepared, working on the movie, and VERY slowly working on the next Game Dungeon. I'm staying busy one way or another! COMMENTS

I did not know about that :V I just hope you get on terms with the horrible eldritch secrets Yeah I just watched playthroughs for the later endings that required a skill cliff dropoff. I beat it with two of the endings though.

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » New game dungeon! This has been one I've been wanting to make for a while, I think it came out pretty well. In the last videochat, I predicted it would come out in 3 days. I honestly believed that, since I thought it was "mostly" done. Here it is a week and a half later, with me working most of the time on it, with it FINALLY being finished. It honestly astounds me how much time the small simple things end up taking. I run into so many things that should conceptually only take about 10 minutes that end up taking 1.5 hours for one reason or another. Or else they will take 10 minutes, but then I realize I'm forgetting 10 other small parts also. On that note, after the next video, I plan to really catch up on email and help offers so I can be more efficient on future videos, but I have lots of stuff planned. For the immediate future, expect the next video to be a Planetside 2 "recruitment" video for a hopefully monthly play session with fans I hope to get started sometime this month. In the meantime, enjoy Rama! COMMENTS

Windflow: I'll bring this up for the next videochat. I think it's a complicated situation, though of course I like players having the option to play the game how they want.

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » Here's the latest videochat, many topics discussed! Also in this video is a followup to the Ross Rants: Robot Jobs video from not long ago if you want to hear more about that (it starts at 6:07). As for the highlights, the next Game Dungeon will hopefully be out in a few days, then I'll be working on the Planetside 2 Recruitment video. I also hope to make a huge dent in emails and getting other projects underway this month. It's possible I'll have an additional Game Dungeon this month, but I can't say for certain yet. More stuff coming either way! COMMENTS

I promise it's actually just a coincidence.

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » Back by popular demand! Moon Gaming returns in another episode. You may want to check this one out, even if you weren't a fan of the original, as this one happened to deal with many of the criticisms of the previous one. Also, the next videochat is at 4pm EST on April 3rd at twitch.tv/rossbroadcast COMMENTS

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » I was on the GOGcast a couple weeks ago where we talked about various topics, but games dying in particular. For those that don't know, GOG.com is an online store that sells games without any DRM. They're also known for getting a lot of older titles runnable again on modern systems. Anyway, the format is structured a lot like the Co-Optional podcast I was on earlier. I think there was a lot of good discussion, although we may have gone in circles a little too much talking about games being killed, but it's obviously something I can get carried away on. More videos coming before too long! COMMENTS

This is a blog post. To read the original post, please click here » Well I have some minor bad news. First, I ran into some complications with the next Game Dungeon and it's going to have to be delayed several days. My plan is to get it released shortly after the next videochat. Second, I received so many varied comments on the Robot Jobs video, I was going to create a followup video to that. Unfortunately the footage to that got screwed up, so I decided to scrap it. I'll try and address some of the bigger followup comments I had when I do the videochat on April 3, however. Speaking of the videochat, if you have questions for the next videochat, you can post them in the comments below. COMMENTS

The blurring is on my end, the coloring is Youtube's doing. Well the upside is if a problem is severe enough, it can't be ignored. In a way, that's less dangerous than chipping away at rights, livelihood, working conditions, etc. small bits at a time.

That article is over a year old. Since then we've seen levels of air pollution in Beijing 40x the safe limit: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/07/beijing-pollution-red-alert-smog-engulfs-capital According to this one, air pollution is killing 4000 people a day in China, accounting for 17% of all deaths: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/18/china-air-pollution-far-worse-than-thought-study.html To me, that's a totally unacceptable cost of doing business and means we should rethink how we're doing everything. It actually HAS improved overall in 2015, but only by about 6% since 2014, which I still think is insane for what's essentially a state of emergency. China is a massive country, of course it won't be all polluted. But pollution levels in key industrial areas are simply atrocious. I think it's largely the result of our manufacturing base being moved there. We had godawful pollution in the Rust Belt previously, and LA was known for very bad levels as well. I think it has less to do with us cleaning it up, and more with us outsourcing it. I am very aware that Western demand contributes to this. I would scale down everything I did if I thought that would impact things, but I'm just an individual, this would have to be a macro-level effort. I think the only sane way to reduce pollution will be to reduce resource use across the board, though that's not something our culture is accustomed to. I also think you're framing the situation in a dishonest manner. I don't consider trade restrictions based on practices that would be illegal in our country because of how harmful they are to the environment to be "bullying." Furthermore, you're implying that 1.4 billion Chinese living in poverty is entirely the USA's responsibility with signing a trade agreement with them. Why is the fate of that many Chinese suddenly the USA's responsibility? Furthermore, calling it unethical, feels more like a blackmail tactic in discussing this. It reminds me of Congress calling awful legislation something positive. Like the Patriot Act taking away a massive amount of rights. Surely, you're a patriot and not anti-American, regardless of what's written in that act? I see this tactic as the same thing. I feel that entire framing is disingenuous. It's looking at one single element to a very complex problem and taking a "you're either part of the help, or part of the problem" attitude and is a way to shut down discussion and is not a process that leads to finding better solutions. If a modification was made to the agreement that we would agree to trade IF more stringent environmental laws were enforced, would that suddenly jeopardize the entire population of China, or more likely, would they still agree, but then the companies running these would make less profits because they would have to invest more money in cleanup and pollution control? Now your point about how other countries would move in is certainly a possibility, however, I think that's saying the environment is screwed either way, and better to make money off and be part of the problem than not. I think leading by example would be the better approach, even if that doesn't maximize profit. The economy would have to be shored up in other ways, which again, why this is a very complex problem. The thing is, implying that not moving forward with trade that I believe will exacerbate the pollution situation I feel is extremely short sighted. You framed what I said as caring more about the environment than the people, which again, I find disingenuous and it's trying to make me look like the villain, when in reality I think what we're doing would not be a "solution" at all, except for the short term and would make things worse in the long term. Say we sign it and see prosperity among the Chinese people for a few years. How many are going to die from cancer because of the increased industry? How many will be dead 20, or 40 years from now because of long-term damage to environment? Furthermore, does this establish a precedent that it's just okay to pollute for profit, making laws in the future more lax, leading to even more deaths from it? Of course I don't want the Chinese people to suffer from it, but I think we're borrowing against the future if environmental factors aren't considered. I care about humanity as a whole, not just for today. Taking out a payday loan to pay for groceries and rent today is great for the short term, but creates far more problems in the long term, I see a lack of concern for the environment to be the same thing. Anyway, I feel like this could go on for ages and you likely have many varied points, but I can't debate this sort of thing any further with the tactics you're using, sorry. Specifically, presenting what I consider 2 flawed approaches to a complex situation, then saying I'm unethical and don't care about people if I'm against option A. I think it's ironic that you're calling me being wary of legislation that I think will harm the environment as "bullying", all things considered. Anyway, you're free to discuss this more of course, but I think I'm done with discussing this with you, since I need more of a rational discourse to finding out the truth of the matter. Your accusatory approach is not how to win me over on anything.

Somebody emailed me this with the same argument. I'm just going to copy / paste my response here: If the bottom line for a company drops, that's no guarantee that leads to price savings passed on to the consumer. That typically only happens in highly competitive markets. Sometimes that is the case, in other oligopoly situations, it's clearly not. ISPs are an easy target. Here in Europe, I can get 5Mbps internet for $5 as there is lots of competition. In the USA, I've never lived anywhere I could get broadband for less than $40, despite massive subsidies from the government to fund it. While Google fiber has disrupted this somewhat, for many years (and still in many other places), companies have essentially agreed to keep prices at a set range in order to optimize profits. Competition, while good for the consumer, isn't good for profits. Large corporations prefer not to compete when they have that option. The music industry is another example. CDs were initially more expensive than cassettes when they came out because they involved initial increased production costs and a more attractive product. Eventually production costs collapsed (CDs are far cheaper to produce than cassettes once outfitted), however, the prices never came down. Also, digital copies of new videogames tend to cost the exact same price as physical copies, despite lower costs. Printer ink cartridges cost far, far more to purchase than they do to produce, but again, companies have collectively agreed to keep them higher in order to maximize profits. No one is undercutting one another. While it's certainly a possibility, I think there's no reason to ASSUME prices will drop if the fast food industry switched over to robotic cooks. Not only will the companies be eager to recoup their initial investment costs, but if similar deals are struck across fast food companies (or the first one to automate establishes the standards), they could remain the same. Maybe more attention could be paid to packaging and presentation (or nicer building furnishings) of the meal to try justify it in the minds of the consumer. After all, the public is already used to the current prices. Why rock the boat? Alternately, say if McDonald's automates first. Burger King might see the opportunity to undercut them by 10% once they automate later, however, they're unlikely to do so. Price wars are often not in corporations' best interests if agreements can be struck instead. It could be far more profitable for BK to continue competing with McDonald's charging similarly inflated prices than it would be to try and undercut them. It could be a losing strategy in the long term and lower profits in the short term. Either way, it means a lot of risk, another thing corporations don't like. That's sometimes true, however, money velocity in the USA is currently at an all time low (or close to it). In scenarios like that, the money is not getting invested as much as it being hoarded.

See this is a good example of "one side of the story." It's long, but I recommend reading this article. HSBC had a whistleblower against it, a long trail of evidence spanning a decade, and a DOJ scared to bring criminal charges. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/gangster-bankers-too-big-to-jail-20130214?page=4 Here's a few highlights: "They violated every goddamn law in the book," says Jack Blum, an attorney and former Senate investigator who headed a major bribery investigation against Lockheed in the 1970s that led to the passage of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. "They took every imaginable form of illegal and illicit business." Anyway, this goes on and on and your article doesn't address half of what's mentioned. This is at the core of why I sometimes need multiple sources on some topics. As for the TPP, I'll let someone else tackle that. I will say though that you said every economist thinks free-trade is great, but it also treats the environment as an externality. China's current pollution would currently be criminal in the USA. I personally think we should reduce trade as much as possible with countries that don't enforce environmental laws, otherwise they have no profit incentive to reduce the pollution. My understanding is while there are a few weak provisions, the TPP would in reality curb pollution no more than something like NAFTA did.