Because it establishes that the creator’s authority is not absolute and the consumer has quite a bit of sway in how products are created and commercialized. Unless you are one of such people who believe indirect coercion of the free market doesn’t count as coercion? If the creator of a for-profit work must (more or less) present their work in a specific way otherwise no-body will buy it, that is coercion and a slight to the creator’s authority, no?
No. Video games are fundamentally artistic expression. If YOU choose to engage with them commercially then you do so at the creators direction and on their terms.
We’re not talking about public utilities, survival essentials, or any other tangible goods. We are talking about something inherently experiential in nature.
Yeah I mean I agree with you on the topic of video games in general. It’s cool. But like I said, this original article, movement, etc, is for video games that are sold to customers for money and for profit.
If YOU choose to engage with them commercially then you do so at the creators direction and on their terms.
Yes, and I said that the consumers in general can coerce creators by choosing which works to engage with. Again, If the creator of a for-profit work must (more or less) present their work in a specific way otherwise no-body will buy it, that is coercion and a slight to the creator’s authority, no? (Bolded for emphasis)
You might have a point if indie development and publishing wasn’t in the middle of literal renaissance… Things made the way YOU prefer are hardly disappearing. If AAA gaming isn’t for you anymore, then move on; no need to announce your departure.
Again, my problem is people in these types of threads, and frankly outlets like GamesRadar, presenting their opinions as though they represent opinions of anything other than a loud and incredibly tiny minority of the 3,700,000,000 gamers in the world right now.
Nope that was meant for you. You were insinuating that developers won’t be able to make money if they don’t “comply” with some draconian corporate strategy they loath… and the reality just doesn’t support that.
Indie developers are making more money and getting more mainstream coverage than at any point in history.
We live in a fully globalized world, anyone can absolutely stand behind their sole creative vision for their game and make a living today.
Sorry, it took me for a surprise because I don’t believe I have expressed any preference for a type of video game here. No, I am not insinuating that developers won’t be able to make money if they don’t “comply” with some draconian corporate strategy they loath. Like I said earlier, it’s a hypothetical scenario.
Because it establishes that the creator’s authority is not absolute and the consumer has quite a bit of sway in how products are created and commercialized. Unless you are one of such people who believe indirect coercion of the free market doesn’t count as coercion? If the creator of a for-profit work must (more or less) present their work in a specific way otherwise no-body will buy it, that is coercion and a slight to the creator’s authority, no?
The creator can continue to produce their work in whatever way they want. Art does not require an observer to exist or be valuable.
I appreciate that sentiment, but let’s stay on topic. This and the original article, movement, etc, are for commercial ventures no?
No. Video games are fundamentally artistic expression. If YOU choose to engage with them commercially then you do so at the creators direction and on their terms.
We’re not talking about public utilities, survival essentials, or any other tangible goods. We are talking about something inherently experiential in nature.
Yeah I mean I agree with you on the topic of video games in general. It’s cool. But like I said, this original article, movement, etc, is for video games that are sold to customers for money and for profit.
Yes, and I said that the consumers in general can coerce creators by choosing which works to engage with. Again, If the creator of a for-profit work must (more or less) present their work in a specific way otherwise no-body will buy it, that is coercion and a slight to the creator’s authority, no? (Bolded for emphasis)
You might have a point if indie development and publishing wasn’t in the middle of literal renaissance… Things made the way YOU prefer are hardly disappearing. If AAA gaming isn’t for you anymore, then move on; no need to announce your departure.
Again, my problem is people in these types of threads, and frankly outlets like GamesRadar, presenting their opinions as though they represent opinions of anything other than a loud and incredibly tiny minority of the 3,700,000,000 gamers in the world right now.
I think you responded to the wrong post 😅
Nope that was meant for you. You were insinuating that developers won’t be able to make money if they don’t “comply” with some draconian corporate strategy they loath… and the reality just doesn’t support that.
Indie developers are making more money and getting more mainstream coverage than at any point in history.
We live in a fully globalized world, anyone can absolutely stand behind their sole creative vision for their game and make a living today.
Sorry, it took me for a surprise because I don’t believe I have expressed any preference for a type of video game here. No, I am not insinuating that developers won’t be able to make money if they don’t “comply” with some draconian corporate strategy they loath. Like I said earlier, it’s a hypothetical scenario.