Markus Persson/notch is the top contributor for humblebundle

  • 66 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by csl316 (9411 posts) -
@Humanity

I appreciate that he donates a lot of money and helps out even if it is in some vain way of being on top, but I still dislike him as a person.

Don't like Notch? How is that possible?

Also, why is someone posting essays about donations here? People giving out money is a good thing, last I checked.
#52 Posted by mnzy (2925 posts) -

There's a joke in there somewhere about what Psychonauts 2 will cost him.

#53 Posted by Village_Guy (2660 posts) -

I guess he wants to beat the Humble Brony Bundle, since we made number one last time :P

Oh well, it is all in good fun and the money goes to a good cause - no matter whether it goes to the charity or the developers.

#54 Posted by mnzy (2925 posts) -
@Village_Guy said:

I guess he wants to beat the Humble Brony Bundle, since we made number one last time :P

Oh well, it is all in good fun and the money goes to a good cause - no matter whether it goes to the charity or the developers.

Who's "we"?
#55 Posted by Humanity (10037 posts) -

@csl316: Stuff I read about him and stuff he has said whether in misunderstanding or not made him sound kind of like a dick. Maybe he's a great guy but thats the impression I got FROM THE INTERNET.

#56 Edited by csl316 (9411 posts) -

@Humanity: Understandable. See, my impressions are based solely on this video:

#57 Edited by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

@csl316: Isn't that a bit like assuming Suda isn't horribly sexist just because he said he was trying to make a strong female lead character in Lolipop Chainsaw or whatever? Not to be a dick, just saying that seems like an odd way to make assumptions about someone.

@JasonR86 said:

@codynewill said:

@PeasantAbuse: Fedoras are universally horrible.

This entire thread reminds me of the book "The Life You Can Save" by Peter Singer. His argument is that everyone, not just super rich people, can give much more to those in need. Singer claims there is no limit to how much you should give, especially if you're rich. It seems that some people feel the same way about Notch, but I can't really knock him for giving. Anyone who gives to those in need is doing a good deed in my eyes. Sure, he could probably give more, but at least he is giving something (much more than I, or anyone else buying the bundle are.)

Singer sounds like an uppity bitch. Sure, everyone could donate more money. But announcing it, as Singer did through his book, makes it appear as if he is demanding it. It's the whole "don't count someone else's money" thing. It isn't Singer's, or anyone else's, business what another does with their money. Even if he isn't really making demands of others, by announcing this philosophy Singer sounds arrogant and snobby. The same goes for those who are saying Notch, who is a very wealthy person, should give more. Notch should give what Notch wants to give. Anyone who says otherwise is butting into business that doesn't concern them.

There's a difference between having a philosophy and pushing it on others. Some prissy brat trying to convert me to believe in some big dummy made of clouds? That's dumb. Her believing that God is good and believing in God is also good? Nothing wrong with that. If someone's allowed control over money, everyone else if allowed to have whatever philosophy they want. Simply sharing that philosophy hardly sounds uppity or bitch or obnoxious. People can believe what they want, spend what they want, and look down or up or straight on to people however they want. It's not a one way road, if you want one freedom, you have to allow the rest.

@myketuna: I don't think anyone actually said anyone was an ass for not donating more, just that it wasn't some amazing thing that makes him suddenly a philanthropist or makes the fact that he donated all that note-worthy. No one doubts that it's good that charity is getting money, just weather or not it's worth putting a guy on a pedestal because he has the means to give and does so. And given that you're not a millionaire (or you just keep a LOT of money in a vault under your house because you're too paranoid to trust a bank...) none of it really applies to you anyway.

@mnzy said:

@Village_Guy said:

I guess he wants to beat the Humble Brony Bundle, since we made number one last time :P

Oh well, it is all in good fun and the money goes to a good cause - no matter whether it goes to the charity or the developers.

Who's "we"?

You could have left it alone. Dear god why.

@AjayRaz said:

@ZeForgotten said:

People whining about a guy with a lot of money donating "so little" are idiots though.

NO HE SHOULD BE DONATING HALF OF HIS MONEY SHUT UP

I'll give a 10 dollar steam game of the poster's choice to anyone that can give me a quote of someone criticizing him for donating "so little" in this thread, before this post (barring edited posts). Seriously. I'm pretty sure no one said "oh wow, he only donated several thousand? What a terrible person." Offer only valid one per unique quote. I'm not made of money after all.

@Humanity said:

@csl316: Stuff I read about him and stuff he has said whether in misunderstanding or not made him sound kind of like a dick. Maybe he's a great guy but thats the impression I got FROM THE INTERNET.

I've heard/noticed he's a bit cocky and confrontational, and can be a bit immature, but that's true of pretty much all internet dwellers. He's also had some pretty admirable stances on things in and out of the games industry. I think he made a very public statement condemning shitty DRM so he can't be all that bad.

I think a lot of people just don't like him because it's pretty silly and ridiculous to become rich because you made something like Minecraft, of all things. But I could be wrong.

#58 Posted by Nottle (1915 posts) -

Notch and the Brony bundle were usurped by "crashplan."

Also stop complaining about someone doing something good.

#59 Posted by JasonR86 (9723 posts) -

@codynewill said:

@JasonR86 said:

@codynewill said:

@PeasantAbuse: Fedoras are universally horrible.

This entire thread reminds me of the book "The Life You Can Save" by Peter Singer. His argument is that everyone, not just super rich people, can give much more to those in need. Singer claims there is no limit to how much you should give, especially if you're rich. It seems that some people feel the same way about Notch, but I can't really knock him for giving. Anyone who gives to those in need is doing a good deed in my eyes. Sure, he could probably give more, but at least he is giving something (much more than I, or anyone else buying the bundle are.)

Singer sounds like an uppity bitch. Sure, everyone could donate more money. But announcing it, as Singer did through his book, makes it appear as if he is demanding it. It's the whole "don't count someone else's money" thing. It isn't Singer's, or anyone else's, business what another does with their money. Even if he isn't really making demands of others, by announcing this philosophy Singer sounds arrogant and snobby. The same goes for those who are saying Notch, who is a very wealthy person, should give more. Notch should give what Notch wants to give. Anyone who says otherwise is butting into business that doesn't concern them.

I don't know about uppity bitch, but Singer is demanding for sure. One thing we don't know is how much Notch even truly gives to charity. You can customize the payment sliders to go straight to the developers, bandwidth costs, or charity, so it is entirely possible that Notch just gives it all to the developers. Though, something tells me he probably splits it.

    up·pi·ty

    adjective /ˈəpətē/

    1. Self-important; arrogant
      • - an uppity sister-in-law
    bitch

    noun /biCH/
    bitches, plural

    1. informal. ...spiteful or unpleasant...
    2. informal. A difficult or unpleasant situation or thing

I think uppity bitch works.

#60 Posted by Hunter5024 (5958 posts) -

@MordeaniisChaos: I just think this line of thinking diminishes what people do for charity, and I don't see any reason for that. The cool thing about charity is that no one has any responsibility to donate to it, and it's never a given that someone should give up their money to help someone they will never meet, but people do it anyways. I don't care why they do it, the fact that they do is enough for me.

#61 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

@Hunter5024: It certainly diminishes their personal involvement, but not the actual act and cause of charity. The fact that the reason behind something doesn't matter to you in terms of how you feel about them as a person is a little ridiculous. I will always be happy money is going to a charity, but that is not at ALL the same thing as promoting someone because of it. Again, whatever you wanna think is fine by me. I was just raised to believe that charity wasn't something that got recognition for an individual. Or at least, I was raised never to seek it myself, but to always seek out opportunities to perform charity, anonymously when possible. I also believe something like serving your country is something you have a responsibility to do, assuming your country isn't full of neo-Nazis and other skinhead types (I'm lookin at you, Greece, you crazies!). But I don't believe either significant charity or service to your country is required to be a good person. I generally believe people to be good and their actions to be similarly good. It's just the whole point of charity is to help others, not yourself, which means if you are looking for recognition or need to be encouraged to do it with something like recognition, you are doing it for the wrong reasons, and I'm certainly not going to give you recognition of any kind for your actions, no matter how big. But I'll certainly celebrate when that situation results in millions donated to the Wounded Warrior Project or something.

@JasonR86: Encourages people to do good, is an uppity bitch. What are you, FOX News incarnate? Was MLK Jr an uppity bitch for saying all people should respect and treat with kindness any other person regardless of the color of their skin of country of origin? Sometimes a philosophy is just a philosophy, and sometimes their true, or at least fair to believe. I haven't read any Peter Singer, but the description of his philosophy is far from offensive, unless you are the type who believes the only thing that is good is what a person wants to do.

@Nottle said:

Notch and the Brony bundle were usurped by "crashplan."

Also stop complaining about someone doing something good.

Again, I'll give you a 10 dollar steam game if you can show me someone actually complaining, rather than just saying "It's good that the charity got money, but my opinion of Notch is unchanging, because that's exactly how charity is traditionally supposed to be treated. It's as accepted in society not to give recognition for charity as it is not to give booze money to a homeless man. Behaving like everyone who thinks this is unworthy of praise is some dickhead trashing the act or individual is just plain childish and shows a complete lack of understanding or perhaps just ignorance of what was actually said. Money was donated, this is good, no one really said otherwise.

#62 Posted by Nottle (1915 posts) -

@MordeaniisChaos: I don't know. these comments seem very cynical, to paraphrase: "I'd pay that much if I had more money than god" "I'd pay if I was a multi millionaire" "A millionaire donates 6k, WOW impressive/ sarcasm." People are accusing Notch of vanity and that donating "only 6000" is so insincere. That seems like complaining. It is his money, he earned it, he can do what he wants with it.

I don't want to be that cynical, but if you want to be follow kantian ethics go ahead.

Also if you want to say that Notch has some sort of obligation or motive keep in mind the entire point of having games in exchange for donations is to motivate people to donate. Some people will donate money for the sake of good will, but I'm sure many people would not have donated if not for the games.

#63 Posted by JasonR86 (9723 posts) -

@MordeaniisChaos:

Yes, MLK was an uppity bitch.

...dumbass.

#64 Posted by SarjuTheRapper (279 posts) -
@GODWASP said:

I dont get why some of you are being no negative... I know enough rich pricks and by rich I mean they make Markus look middle class at best. Yet these people don't do shit for anyone but when someone like Markus does donate an amount, You people consider 10k a cheap sum of money. It makes me angry and a bit sad.

fuckin haters man
#65 Posted by Hunter5024 (5958 posts) -

@MordeaniisChaos: I just think your beliefs are kind of conflicting. If charity is good, and you agree that there's no reason why you should have to give away your money, then why isn't it okay to be respectful and appreciative of a person who chooses to do so? Also I don't think it's ridiculous to be indifferent about someone's motivation for committing good deeds. Thoughts should not be rewarded, actions are what count. None of us can pretend like we know his exact reasons for doing what he did because we don't know what he thinks. It's presumptuous and arrogant for us to try to label him with what we think his motivations are. So therefore our opinions of the man should be based upon what we see of his actions, not our assumptions about what he thinks. I just have trouble understanding your viewpoint, but that's okay. We can agree to disagree =)

#66 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

@Hunter5024: If you are celebrating the what, yes, actions are what matters. When you are talking about the "goodness" of a person, then motivation absolutely matters. Politicians give money to charity to drive votes all the time, and that's great for charity, and awesome, but it does by NO MEANS make them good people. Again, you're doing what every other quick to anger idiot on here has done: mix up what my indifference is leveled at. I think charity getting money is AWESOME. But I do not believe giving to charity when you live well above your means, and especially without doing more work than many who struggle to make it by on the paychecks they earn, makes you awesome. Notch made a silly game, and made a shit ton of money. Yes, he worked hard with his team. Yes, he made a really great thing. Yes, I'm glad it exists. But my father worked 6 day weeks, 12 hour days in construction and ended up with a lot of medical issues and thus medical bills, AND was barely able to support his family as a single parent. He did that for about 15 years, and yet in that time made less money than Notch did doing something he loves, and spent pretty much every last cent just getting by. So I could care less if you or anyone else thinks I'm an idiot or an ass for saying, "people who make a quick buck doing what they love or in a cushy job can live to donate a lot of their money without receiving any praise what so ever."

@Nottle said:

@MordeaniisChaos: I don't know. these comments seem very cynical, to paraphrase: "I'd pay that much if I had more money than god" "I'd pay if I was a multi millionaire" "A millionaire donates 6k, WOW impressive/ sarcasm." People are accusing Notch of vanity and that donating "only 6000" is so insincere. That seems like complaining. It is his money, he earned it, he can do what he wants with it.

I don't want to be that cynical, but if you want to be follow kantian ethics go ahead.

Also if you want to say that Notch has some sort of obligation or motive keep in mind the entire point of having games in exchange for donations is to motivate people to donate. Some people will donate money for the sake of good will, but I'm sure many people would not have donated if not for the games.

There's nothing cynical about considering it unworthy of praise. No one said he was an ass for only donating that much, just that it's not a huge amount. There was a time when Minecraft was making six times what my family got by on on a year, in one day so excuse me if I don't bow down to the rich man giving as much money as I've seen people with much less give. Like it or not, giving a fraction of your wealth away is nothing. Some of the richest people in the world spent most of their money and effort bettering mankind. Some of the poorest have dedicated their lives to bettering the lives of others. I know a guy who is giving up a potentially brilliant career and a huge scholarship to serve his country and live on pretty piss poor wages. They don't do it so they can get fucking recognized, so why the fuck does anyone care that some people feel charity should be anonymous and that a man who makes inordinate amounts of money donating a few thousand ever few months is no more worth praise then someone spending an hour at a soup kitchen. It's charity, if he wants praise, he can go when the Olympics or enlist and prove some valor, otherwise, he's still a guy in a hat that made an awesome thing and theoretically (assuming the money didn't just go to the devs, who have already had a hell o fa lot of success so I wouldn't consider that much "charity") does his part to keep the world a better place.

What I don't get is why everyone gives a fuck about how I don't idolize him for making a donation but I also don't demonize him for donating as much as he did, but he's allowed to do what he wants with all the money he made? How is his money any more his than my personal feelings towards him are mine to do with whatever we want? It's hilarious that I'm an ass for saying "Yay charity" and stopping there but he's a fucking angel for giving some tiny percent of the worth of a little thing called Minecraft. Seriously. As of a year ago, Minecraft had made $33 million. According to the stats page, over 6 million purchases were made. Considering the MINIMUM cost of the game, that's a shit ton of money. For a pretty tiny dev team, independently published. And if I had to guess, upkeep on Minecraft's servers isn't cheap, but it's far from monumental either. Yes, donating to charity is the right thing to do. But you know what? If you can criticize me for not fawning over Notch for his not so impressive donation to maybe a charity, maybe some of the most successful indie developers out there, then I can feel that way. It only makes sense, really. If I asked you to give 3% of your yearly earnings, you'd probably be A-Ok with that. How is it any more special when Notch does it, just because he has more money and therefore can afford to donate more? Hell, if it'll get me put on a pedestal, I'll give all of the $6.36 I have under my name to the first charity that asks.

All I have to say is this: people with money should be encouraged to help those who cannot help themselves. Like it or not, some people just have so much money that expecting them to put some of that "hard earned" cash back into the public well being isn't a big deal. You're all willing to do it, why shouldn't they be? Are you going to go around, asking for people to high five you because you donating some percent of your great wealth to a charity? Not without looking like an asshole. But then I'm an asshole for not wanting to go out and give you that high five even though you didn't ask for it in the first place. Logic. Brilliant, I see all of your points now.

In closing: Notch is probably a decent guy, wears a dumb hat, and means jack shit to me until he donates a large sum of money to the Wounded Warrior Program. Then, I'll give him a high five and no more.

Peace, I'm out.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.