I see it as a different scenario when that translates to competitive advantage though. I couldn't care less about this existing here, it does not affect me.
Not losing your shit over small encroachments is how we got from $2.50 horse armour to every single game locking costumes behind a paywall
You are familiar with the expression: give them an inch and they will take a mile? The slipppery slope? The thin end of the wedge?
They are experimenting until they find something that works.
and part of the reason why I think it is so difficult for people to articulate why they are offended, is it just is offensive, it offends sensibilities, it breaks up an enjoyable artistic experience into distinctively marketable chunks, it's disengaging, a lot of us just don't want to see a marketplace at all, we don't want to see price tags for extras, we want the UI, the menu, everything to feel like one complete, cohesive package
can you imagine if you were watching Netflix, and they introduced exclusive content you had to pay extra for? Maybe you could earn enough good boy points to watch it by watching enough ads, on the service you already pay for, so you can still earn the right to watch it for "free"
what if TV episodes were still inclusive, but cut content and behind the scenes footage was extra?
what if you are enjoying a nice piece of art, but now you have to purchase a unique URL which links to your own private copy of it?
can you imagine reading a book and every time you start a new chapter you get an advert to buy another book? what if some chapters were just paywalled behind a link online?
things are just made worse by monetisation, there's nothing more to it, you had something good, and someone made it slightly shitter in order to turn a profit - capitalism in its purest form
if microtransactions had any artistic merit of course they would be developed in a moneyless society as well
Not losing your shit over small encroachments is how we got from $2.50 horse armour to every single game locking costumes behind a paywall
You are familiar with the expression: give them an inch and they will take a mile? The slipppery slope? The thin end of the wedge?
I'm not defending Capcom or microtransactions, but this argument seems kinda anti-materialist. No amount of "voting with our wallets" would have ever stopped capitalist executives from monetizing the hell out of anything they could to a more blatant extent. It's baked into the capitalist system of milking art for profit.
I see it as a different scenario when that translates to competitive advantage though. I couldn't care less about this existing here, it does not affect me.
Not losing your shit over small encroachments is how we got from $2.50 horse armour to every single game locking costumes behind a paywall
You are familiar with the expression: give them an inch and they will take a mile? The slipppery slope? The thin end of the wedge?
They are experimenting until they find something that works.
and part of the reason why I think it is so difficult for people to articulate why they are offended, is it just is offensive, it offends sensibilities, it breaks up an enjoyable artistic experience into distinctively marketable chunks, it's disengaging, a lot of us just don't want to see a marketplace at all, we don't want to see price tags for extras, we want the UI, the menu, everything to feel like one complete, cohesive package
can you imagine if you were watching Netflix, and they introduced exclusive content you had to pay extra for? Maybe you could earn enough good boy points to watch it by watching enough ads, on the service you already pay for, so you can still earn the right to watch it for "free"
what if TV episodes were still inclusive, but cut content and behind the scenes footage was extra?
what if you are enjoying a nice piece of art, but now you have to purchase a unique URL which links to your own private copy of it?
can you imagine reading a book and every time you start a new chapter you get an advert to buy another book? what if some chapters were just paywalled behind a link online?
things are just made worse by monetisation, there's nothing more to it, you had something good, and someone made it slightly shitter in order to turn a profit - capitalism in its purest form
if microtransactions had any artistic merit of course they would be developed in a moneyless society as well
I'm not defending Capcom or microtransactions, but this argument seems kinda anti-materialist. No amount of "voting with our wallets" would have ever stopped capitalist executives from monetizing the hell out of anything they could to a more blatant extent. It's baked into the capitalist system of milking art for profit.
People did rightfully lose their shit over horse armor way back in the day, and it predictably did fuck all in the end. You even admit this yourself.