• brsrklf@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I don’t pay any subscription for games, I hate the idea of not being able to play what I want whenever I want. Even when it’s free (fuck you, No man’s sky expeditions FOMO).

    But yeah, even though there are games that are not necessarily slop but with a structure that ensures I can enjoy them for hundreds of hours, it doesn’t feel fair that they’d dwarf the cool shorter ones I also play for revenues.

    Some of the games I’ve completed in a dozen of hours still live rent-free in my head (most of them in a good way).

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I was more hoping for a way to passively support indie devs that the market may otherwise not be giving enough attention to. I agree, I’d rather own a license (or better yet, physical copy) of a game and play it when I want, but I still view that relationship as part of the problem. I’d rather quality artwork not need to worry so much about playing the attention-lottery in order to survive.

      • Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        The problem is “passive”. Its not helpful to a game developer to not play their games cause then no one engages with their art. I wouldnt want to pay for a musician I dont listen to.

        We do need a way to discover stuff easier. That was one of the joys of the early internet compared to now. But if you want to support indie devs, follow them or find smaller stuff and support it. Ignore the algorithms, decide what you want and look for it. Life isn’t passive.

        • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          I wouldnt want to pay for a musician I dont listen to.

          I disagree, and here is why.

          The difference is between entertainment value and artistic value. There are a lot of art (music, film, writing, games, etc) that I think are important to exist for the betterment of humanity, but are too emotionally heavy to enjoy recreationally, or too niche for most people to engage with it; and yet, I believe are important that they exist. I want to support quality art that falls into those categories, even if I never consume them, because if I don’t, then one day when someone does come up with an idea that would be relevant to my niche, they are less likely to make it.

          I don’t want a game’s ability to maximize engagement to be what determines how valuable it is, which is equivalent to saying, I don’t want the games I put my money toward to only be the games that I engage with. If you agree with the first half, then you must agree with the second half.

          • Krauerking@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Sure, but you need someone who is inspired by it to have played it to be so. Dont get me wrong I also agree with things existing for the sake of it but thats also up to someone inspired enough.

            I think its on the individual to not be responsible to spread themselves out but to actually interact with their niche and keep it alive, I want the games I engage with to be engaged with so that its felt.

            I dont think art needs my support as much as people do.