Yet Riot does it on a daily fucking basis, and r%%%%%s believe them.
Oh but trust me, Riot puts quality above all else, even money! Yeah, for sure. I can see it in everything they do!
Sure would be nice if any company gave a fuck beyond income potential anymore. But, things don't work that way anymore. Gimme generation made sure of that.
AeroWaffle4 votesIn what way specifically has Riot lied to you?
GankedByWindows3 votesFalse advertising can be illegal in the US, but where have they lied? You're going to have to point that out, because I can't think of anything they've outright lied about.
As an aside, a poorly written post that ends up blaming the "Gimme generation" for what a company that isn't managed by the "Gimme generation" is hilarious and wrong.
Niyumi1 votes"We put quality above all else, even money!"
"We don't like it when a champ just up and 100-0s you with no counterplay"
"We don't like braindead statchecks"
"We don't like it when a squishy gets caught out of position, but heals up between fights (spellvamp being removed)"
"X champ was struggling (despite being above average WR), so we buffed them (usually happens before a skin release)"
"We strive for fair, balanced gameplay for everyone" (yet <20% of the champ pool is picked in professional play for a reason)
... and I could go look through the articles Riot spits out and get you many more.
You're right, Riot isn't managed by the gimme generation. So, most people who major in business and go found a company are typically greedy beyond compare. Though they're held in check by their consumer base -- they can only get away with so much. With the gimme generation, that check is entirely removed, since the gimmes are largely unintelligent and/or unwilling to think. So, take Beck, for example. At first, Riot was a good company, they actually had values and whatnot. But, as the game became more and more popular, he learned he could get away with more and more greedy policies and decisions since his new playerbase was much larger (meaning he could stand to lose a few and still make a profit) and didn't know any better to call him out on it.
So, even though the gimme generation doesn't run Riot, they enable shitty, greedy design philosophies -- like F2P.
GankedByWindows3 votes
"We put quality above all else, even money!"
"We don't like it when a champ just up and 100-0s you with no counterplay"
"We don't like braindead statchecks"
"We don't like it when a squishy gets caught out of position, but heals up between fights (spellvamp being removed)"
"X champ was struggling (despite being above average WR), so we buffed them (usually happens before a skin release)"
"We strive for fair, balanced gameplay for everyone" (yet <20% of the champ pool is picked in professional play for a reason)
... and I could go look through the articles Riot spits out and get you many more.
I've heard them say that too. What I don't see is the contradiction. The first one is more PR than anything, but its possible. The rest over the years they've done a fairly good job at doing. I can't think of anything that blatantly goes against one of those principles that they've regarded as a success.
You're right, Riot isn't managed by the gimme generation. So, most people who major in business and go found a company are typically greedy beyond compare. Though they're held in check by their consumer base -- they can only get away with so much. With the gimme generation, that check is entirely removed, since the gimmes are largely unintelligent and/or unwilling to think.
Yeah dude. Totally a problem with the gimme generation. Consumers didn't take shit from companies in any other generation. The Jungle written in 1906 really showed how consumers really provided a check against abuse of the public.
So, even though the gimme generation doesn't run Riot, they enable shitty, greedy design philosophies -- like F2P.
F2P is greedy...somehow? Somehow giving away the product for free is greedy, and only making money off cosmetics that don't effect the game is greedy. Not sure I understand you there.
Warlord Scrap2 votesDo you have any proof like idk maybe inside communication saying buff a champ to increase skin sales or are you just salty
Bob the Toastr2 votesI disagree with the OP, but cough 
cough.
Warlord Scrap1 votesBut hes been like that for a while. Its not like they buffed him for a skin. If anything i think yi would be a better example because he was not so recently buffed (7.4 or 7.5 i think)
Bob the Toastr2 votesTrue, but he was at a very high play rate at the same time he got a new legendary skin... When's the last time 
(lowest play rate) got a legendary skin? Or a skin in general?
Warlord Scrap5 votesHey man i feel you i main yorick but thats just business. The op is reffering to riot straight up lying for monetary gain. And urgot is the next rework.
Niyumi1 votesSG Jinx: Nearly doubled base damage on ult despite having a fine winrate and playrate.
Championship Riven rerelease: Nearly doubled base damage on ult on a champion that is already broken.
Project Ashe: Ashe becomes pick or ban, Riot "fixes" her by nerfing the mana cost on her W and the damage on her ult (both of which did, you know, nothing)
Elementalist Lux: All kinds of random buffs over the last year or so that she didn't need, and then some more after her skin was released, redoing her VO, all that.
Lee: Pretending for YEARS that he's fine, but recently admitting he's broken, but also won't get nerfed because he makes money -- and then turning around and giving him a legendary skin right after saying that.
Just a few recent examples.
TyrekGoldenspear2 votesSG Jinx: Nearly doubled base damage on ult despite having a fine winrate and playrate.
I checked. Jinx's ultimate was buffed in patch 6.17. Her Star Guardian skin was released in 6.20.
However this statement of yours is just plain wrong. First of all, the base damage wasn't touched. The bonus AD ratio was buffed by 50%. Doubled base damage huh?
Championship Riven rerelease: Nearly doubled base damage on ult on a champion that is already broken.
Two things. One Riven isn't broken, you just don't know how to beat her.
Two, while the patches are similar (6.17 to World's 6.18(ish)), once again you overblow the buff to make a poor point. A lvl 18 riven doing 200 instead of 160 damage is nowhere near doubling the damage. Even at max value, the damage is increased from 480 to 600. That is a 25% increase.
Project Ashe: Ashe becomes pick or ban, Riot "fixes" her by nerfing the mana cost on her W and the damage on her ult (both of which did, you know, nothing)
This has bloody nothing to do with the skin. The skin didn't magically make her strong. The skin only made her more popular so that people started complaining about her strength. Plus you mentioned that Riot nerfed her in that patch. So how are they buffing her for skins in this instance?
Elementalist Lux: All kinds of random buffs over the last year or so that she didn't need, and then some more after her skin was released, redoing her VO, all that.
She got a passive buff, a Q nerf, a E buff, bugfixes, and an ult buff. What makes you think she didn't need them? She had a sub 50% winrate all that time, and she still does. And how does a VO update make it into your list of "buffs"?
Lee: Pretending for YEARS that he's fine, but recently admitting he's broken, but also won't get nerfed because he makes money -- and then turning around and giving him a legendary skin right after saying that.
I ain't touching that.
Why do you feel the need to lie to prove a shaky point?
Lying to fellow boards members isn't illegal, but it doesn't help your point if anybody bothers to fact-check. :/
MrHaZeYo2 votesProof?