• dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Your line of reasoning is exactly the same as if a company – for the sake of argument, let’s say Ubisoft for absolutely no particular reason whatsoever – made a shitty product that no one actually wanted to buy, and therefore only sold six copies.

    Who “recoups” the cost then? Nobody. That’s called the inherent risk of operating a business.

    It’s also why indie developers in this day and age typically wind up considerably more successful for both themselves and their employees, because they don’t need to outlay the enormous bloated expenditures of the AAA studios and publishers, nor go to such extreme lengths to desperately rake in enough revenue to break even.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      If they make a shitty title, the company is forced to eat it. After multiples of those, they go out of business because they can’t pay devs.

      The counter argument is what? That game sucks so I deserve a copy? There is no reason to freeload off of either one. Sure sail the seas if you have to, but claiming you’re in the right to do so no matter what is pants on head stupid.

    • merc@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Or, what if a government granted a monopoly on sidewalks within the city to SideWalking Inc. SideWalking spent all kinds of money setting up turnstiles all over the busiest sidewalks equipped with NFC readers, then ran an ad campaign telling people where to buy their sidewalk authorization cards, etc. And then they realized that people were just hopping over the turnstiles! Who recoups the cost to put up all the turnstiles and install all the NFC readers?