Games

16927 readers

2207 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc..
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.

Comments.

No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works

791

Ultrakill dev says it's fine to pirate his game if you don't have money to spare: 'Culture shouldn't exist only for those who can afford it' (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 6 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works

106 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] rdri@lemmy.world 52 points 6 months ago (2 children)

There should be means that would allow fans and appreciators donate money to creators. And it looks like we already have a lot of those.

Also, culture and art should be promoted by governments. Therefore taxes could go that way too.

Anyway, it's not like people say it's fine for everyone to not pay. But at least we know it's fine for many to pay much less than the rest, see regional pricing and discounts. Creators are totally fine with those. Nothing prevents it from being extended further to people who have a hard time trying to become potential customers.

[–] Gigasser@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I think a good compromise is to allow for sale for a period of years, and then when it's no longer making as much profits, for a creator to give permission for it to be ok to be pirated, which basically means that they've sorta kinda maybe ceded legal consequences to pirating their work.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What of there were a model for video games where the games themselves were free to download and play, but things like cosmetics, weapons, stat boosts, and character unlocks were sold piecemeal to those willing to pay?

That model certainly wouldn't become a cancer on the entire industry and ruin online gaming, making us beg for the days when you could just buy a fucking game and play it.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

In a reality where there are no paid games (I assume Witcher-tier single player games would be free), those wouldn't necessarily become a cancer. It all depends on what games you must compete with. Also there are many ways how you can implement cosmetics and other DLC. FOMO enforcement is not something that should automatically come with any game. Deep Rock Galactic handles paid dlc, free seasons and cosmetics brilliantly in my opinion, and I don't see why other games can't have success if they did it the same way. Maybe it's a combination of original financial decisions, game quality, players reactions and overall current situation/background.

Also I can't get rid of the thought that there is an underestimated connection between spending money on a game and desire to spend time on playing it. It seems that if developers of good games would be suitably rewarded according to players satisfaction, there will be no need to pursue financial success by pushing cancer on players.