• 21 Posts
  • 102 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 6th, 2023

help-circle

  • but the people are already kicked… Look if bob works at “bob studios” and i love his work and want to support him, i can buy his game. but if bob got fired long ago, he wont get the money i give to “bob studios”. You are supporting a buisness construct and not the artist in this case here. almost all workers in the game dev field loose their job post project anyway, so you are not even helping them. So i stand by point that this is capitalist propaganda. Its sad but videogame artists get abused by the scene a whole lot. i think it makes sense to show support witht the individuals who make the games you love, rather than the legal steuctures trying to milk them.









  • This videos opinion stems from the unhealthy state of gaming companys and the promise of infinite growth. Companies like EA and Ubisoft and the like have established that after a huge game you have to make an even bigger one. a AAA game has to be followed up by AAAA. best case releasing the next year already. everyone who has experience in managing a company (especially in the gaming industry) knows this is unsustainable and toxic for the art. From Software is the last really big games developer that didnt forget what healty growth is. After they released a banger, they do two-three smaller projects, where you can be more creative and experimenting. less budget and less risk. and use this time, experience and money to work on another big title.




  • to be fair, this is the image the center parties have and upkeep. I, as a farly left person, already question if this seperation to right extremism will still be upheld in 4 years. Our Center-right partie CDU falls more and more for populist rethoric, which reminds me of the republicans or the toris.

    So what you have been told is not wrong per se. But there is a significant amount of people in the country and politicans in the parlaiment, that argue the seperation between right exremism and center parties did already collaps behind the scenes.











  • did you read that? Because to me it really reads like it talks about davincis comissions. Which are not a publishing/patreoning deal. It even talks about his focus on his personal work outside those comissions. just because the word patreon is used in the article makes it support your point…

    But for you i did another quick read of his wikipedia article (do you need a link to that or can you find that on your own?) and read that in the last 7years of his life he had the vatican as a patreon for his art. Before he had two other patreon for shorter times mostly for his engeneering, cartographing and organizing talent.

    and to finish this petty argument of: even when all you claim is true. artist are still able to produce art without a publisher. which was my first point. heck even you can shoot him a donation so they are not as dependent on a publisher deal, if you feel that person deserves more funds. My original point was that a publisher breaking a deal, does not prevent the art from beeing made in principle. and this point stands imo, as i didnt see any conter argument against it yet.