Not really an argument, it’s more so a statement of fact. Businesses exist for one reason alone, to within the confines of the law generate more capital than they spend. If you want an organization whose goal is something else then you need a non-profit organization. A for-profit is by definition for profit. They don’t call it capitalism by accident.
It’s not all that shit of an argument. All companies exist to make money, not products. If they could make money without making products, they would stop making products altogether. Some are more egregious about that fact, but it remains a fact for all companies, even the ones you think are your friends. It’s possible for a company to do what consumers want and still make money, establishing a good relationship that makes both enjoyable products and decent profits, but even those companies are just one leadership change away from short-term profit-driven decisions that run the company to the ground.
But are you? Literally the only people who could possibly make a gamer-first video game is an organization that isn’t money-first. That was my whole point. You have never played a game made by a for-profit developer that wasn’t specifically money-first, even if the gameplay ended up being good in spite of that. Indie devs are the only people making games that sometimes break that mold, and while I wouldn’t exactly call an indie dev “nonprofit,” it’s a lot closer to the truth for the ones that truly make gamer-first games than grouping them with a for-profit corporation.
This is such a shit argument. Reminds me of Linux forums.
“Ya that sucks it doesn’t work, go find the repo and download the source and fix it yourself”
By this logic, Linux is for programmers. And gaming is for business people.
Weird flex, but okay.
Not really an argument, it’s more so a statement of fact. Businesses exist for one reason alone, to within the confines of the law generate more capital than they spend. If you want an organization whose goal is something else then you need a non-profit organization. A for-profit is by definition for profit. They don’t call it capitalism by accident.
You misunderstand my comment. I’m referring to this:
I am well aware how corporations work.
It’s not all that shit of an argument. All companies exist to make money, not products. If they could make money without making products, they would stop making products altogether. Some are more egregious about that fact, but it remains a fact for all companies, even the ones you think are your friends. It’s possible for a company to do what consumers want and still make money, establishing a good relationship that makes both enjoyable products and decent profits, but even those companies are just one leadership change away from short-term profit-driven decisions that run the company to the ground.
You misunderstand my comment. I’m referring to this:
I am well aware how corporations work.
But are you? Literally the only people who could possibly make a gamer-first video game is an organization that isn’t money-first. That was my whole point. You have never played a game made by a for-profit developer that wasn’t specifically money-first, even if the gameplay ended up being good in spite of that. Indie devs are the only people making games that sometimes break that mold, and while I wouldn’t exactly call an indie dev “nonprofit,” it’s a lot closer to the truth for the ones that truly make gamer-first games than grouping them with a for-profit corporation.