[–] 1 point 1 day ago

What do you mean? You were the one who brought morality into this by comparing game developers to Nazi soldiers.

You claim that 'just doing their job' isn't a valid defense, but how else am I supposed to look at it? It is literally their job to find new ways to monetize a product. If a company pushes a bad strategy, consumers can just stop playing and paying, like when BMW tried subscription heated seats and failed because of low sales. Blaming employees for doing what they are hired to do, while people keep playing the game, makes no sense. Trying new ways to make money isn't a moral crime; it's just business.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago

    But what actually makes it bad? Is making a game and wanting to get a financial benefit out of it inherently wrong?

    Why doesn't that same logic apply to celebrities doing brand endorsements, shoving products down our throats that they probably don't even use just because they are famous? And don't forget product placement in movies.

    Also, developing a modern video game can cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and if it flops, it's just a dead loss. Unlike movies, which can recoup losses through streaming deals or cable rights, a bad video game usually means nobody plays it and the studio loses everything. That is a massive financial risk.

    Where do you draw the line?

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›