People like you describe don’t want to play the game
I think this is part of the problem I have.
Are they still pressing buttons and making input? Yes.
Thus, they’re still playing the game.
If you want to sound less judgmental, stop saying they’re not “playing” it or that “they don’t want to play it” just because they’re not “playing it the way I think is right.”
If you really think its okay, accept that when they are still pressing buttons and interacting with the game, they are still functionally playing the game. Not playing the game is watching a Let’s Play.
It’s a pointless distinction rooted in treating people who want an easy mode as “lesser” because “they don’t want to actually play the game.” Sorry, sick of hearing it worded this way.
I think easy game modes take away what a great game makes a great game.
But a lot of people are coming to gaming from traditional media where there is no interaction. A lot of those people like the narratives in games, but don’t love beating a challenge. A lot of those people are tired from long days at work and do not get joy from eking out a win. To them, it feels like a chore, and they didn’t get into this to do chores. They got into it to get away from the stress of the world.
(EDIT: Forgot to mention, this is also why Let’s Play youtubes are popular. I know a guy who doesn’t game at all but has watched full playthroughs of things like Firewatch.)
If you get enjoyment from great game mechanics, more power to you. However, that doesn’t mean those game mechanics are less impactful in story driven games where the gaming is “easier.”
My partner didn’t play games at all until those old Walking Dead games by Telltale came out. They were like a TV show, and she started playing them… because it was like “playing” one of her favorite shows at the time. I literally chose them to introduce her to gaming because it was more like a TV show than a game.
She recently finished Baldur’s Gate 3 on normal and its her favorite game now. So games with easy difficulty levels can also help people who have never gamed before be able to get into it and eventually love the more difficult challenge.
Personal opinion: This is actually excellent because we could actually use developers who have worked these jobs and thus are familiar with how they work, and then they can develop actually useful code for small businesses.
For example: restaurants often have the ability to order online, but they have zero rate limiting, so you can end up with 30 different orders made within 30 seconds of each other and all those people will expect their orders ready at the same time and in the meantime you’ve got exactly three cooks and each meal takes at least five to seven minutes to get out. Someone could design a rate limiter, no one has. Because there aren’t developers working those jobs realizing that workers are being worked to the bone because of businesses refusing to add limits to how much demand can come through their door.
Actually, yeah I can. Every time a fucking bean-counter makes a living humans life worse at their job to save the company a buck is a great time to blame accountants for doing their fucking jobs.
You, as an individual, buy enough of their stuff to support them month-to-month? How generous of you.
Now that the snark is out of the way: Clearly an individual doesn’t make enough money to do that, and if you’re the only new fan they gain that’s still nowhere near enough to make a living.
I think it’s really clear that Rockstar is trying to avoid a repeat of past soundtracks and licensing issues and they want these up-front with no royalty payments to make in the future, so they don’t have to keep re-negotiating licensing (and having to remove/replace songs in old games).
I still think this guy was being smart for asking more, even if he asked too much. You’re right, he shouldn’t have high-balled, but he was smart enough to understand getting a percentage or royalties was probably almost assuredly out of the question.
It takes upward of 200 streams of a track on Spotify to earn a single penny. 20,000 streams to earn a dollar.
(For me and my personal expenses, this would mean I would need 40,000,000 streams per month to pay rent/pay bills/eat. I’m dirt poor and live a dirt poor budget. 40,000,000 streams to pay $1400 in rent is INSANE.)
That “exposure” can still add up to “not paying the bills.”
Also, if he gains no new listeners? He would have made a huge mistake not angling for more money.
This guy is being smart, and the rich just want people to THINK that exposure is worth it. Even Oprah pays in exposure and its bullshit. The company has got the fucking money to pay it they just don’t want to.
If they’re a 1-hit wonder, maybe that’s why they want more up front: In case they gain no new listeners from the GTA 6 soundtrack and continue to be a 1-hit wonder.
It’s like why football players have insane-sounding contracts: Because in the future they won’t be able to make the same kind of money.
Sounds to me like homie was smart and thinking long-term.
and there’s no way Rockstar is going to be paying $99 million dollars for just songs.
GTA V/Online produced $8.5 billion in revenue.
I mean, I guess you’re not wrong, (how else could they be milking it for this much money but being cheap?) but it still makes them fucking cheap bastards.