irmoz

@irmoz@reddthat.com

Profil ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.

irmoz,

How the fuck do you accidentally add popups

irmoz,

Rhetorical question haha, I know it’s bullshit. Popups take effort to create, you can’t just accidentally add them.

Kids on Roblox are hosting protests for Palestine (techcrunch.com)

In the Lego-like world of Roblox, about a hundred blocky avatars march through a lamplit street, wielding Palestine flags that are larger than their own animated bodies. Characters dressed like cartoonish dinosaurs, steampunk zombies and pastel pink pop stars chant together via instant messages in both Malay and English as they...

irmoz, (edited )

That’s a lot of hoops to jump through for your specific approval. I’m sure they’ll work hard to impress you.

irmoz,

Age 17: Get lucky on the dancefloor and maybe in the bedroom.

‘Call of Duty’ Doesn’t Just Depict Bad History—It’s Pro-War Propaganda (progressive.org)

I just started playing COD Black Ops Cold War because I got it through my PlayStation Plus subscription and wanted to try it out. I’ve previously played some others like Modern Warfare (1 and 2) and WWII. While it always felt a bit over the top and propaganda-ish, I really liked it for the blockbuster feeling and just turning...

irmoz, (edited )

You can’t act like media doesn’t help inform your biases. Sure, your opinion on nonexistent crime fighting turtles may not have changed, since that is complete fantasy. But your view on crime itself?

I saw Batman as a kid, and, though Batman obviously isn’t real, crime certainly is, and so are urban decay and bad neighbourhoods in cities. Seeing Batman take out goons and thugs made be believe those goons and thugs existed, and that I’d be in danger if I went out at night. More scared, in fact, because I knew Batman wouldn’t save me, since he isn’t real. The Batman films made Batman feel necessary, and his absence made the world scarier.

irmoz,

Exactly. For an extreme example, to “fantasise” about CSA requires a very warped POV.

irmoz,

They will still need to do crappy things to make profits. It’s the nature of the beast.

irmoz,

Not pay its employees the full value of their labour. Mathematically impossible.

irmoz, (edited )

Nothing stops a game dev company from operating as a cooperative

Apart from existing in a sea of capitalist companies than can ruthlessly outcompete them. Co-operatives don’t stand a chance.

paying the employees their share of the full value of revenue, minus costs involved in production and distribution and presumably some amount of seed funding they all agree to set aside for the next project.

That would only be feasible in a very small company, with sufficient profits to spread among the workforce.

But then, splitting the revenue means splitting the risk. So if the game doesn’t sell enough to recoup costs then the workers get nothing.

Yep, like I just said.

The whole tradeoff of wage labor is that you agree to do a thing for an amount of pay, regardless of what the employer gains from that labor.

I’d frame it as: you need money to live. Therefore, you suck it up and let someone exploit you so they can profit from your work, and give you scraps out of that profit.

You typically don’t get the full value of your labor, but are also insulated from business risks.

Those “business risks” only exist as a result of the same system that necessitates wage labour: capitalism. The risks generally have to do failing to increase growth and therefore going under due to lack of owner capital. A democratic economy has no owners, only a collective workforce who will together use their resources to fund the company and pay their own wages - this means there is no need for growth. That huge risk no longer exists.

If this usually didn’t pay off for the employer, then basically every business would be a co-op

That’s not even worth thinking about. We live in capitalism. Of course working with a capitalist model would work best - it’s the only way to ensure profits for the owners.

(because no one would be willing to pay someone to do a job if they weren’t willing to take a share of the risk)

You’re still assuming an owner. A democratic workplace wouldn’t have an owner - they’d all share responsibility for the business. And pay would be agreed democratically.

but successful co-ops of any scale are pretty rare which suggests a general unwillingness for workers to take on a share of the risks of the business.

No, it suggests that co-ops are ill-equipped to compete. It’s a moral decision, not a business one, and an incredibly risky one. Any company that isn’t willing to exploit its workers will be beaten out by one that is willing to do that, because the competitive, capitalist one will inevitably have more resources to throw behind it.

Think about this: for a company to be a co-op, it either has to be founded that way, or changed some time afterward. A company that runs in a traditionally capitalist way can only have fundamental changes happen at the behest of its owner; workers have no say how their business is run. This means that the small amount of co-ops has nothing to do with workers’ willingness to take risks. It has to do with owners not wanting to relinquish power and profit - an owner can only lose when transitioning to a co-op.

I’m not saying that Re-Logic should be a co-op. I’m saying our entire economic system demands that they exploit their workers.

irmoz, (edited )

My comment wasn’t aimed at Re-Logic precisely, and I admit I was only making assumptions. My assumption was that their company fit into the mold of how capitalist companies operate. If they are a co-op, and practise profit sharing, then I admit I was wrong in my assumption, but I hope you agree it’s an assumption closely related to the reality of capitalist economics.

EDIT: Re-Logic has an owner. Sorry, my original comment stands.

irmoz,

Why not? Why do workers and owners being exactly the same set of people make it impossible to successfully develop games? This is an extra-important question to answer because a lot of these indie dev companies are a dozen or so people in total.

Lot money divided by many people = little money

Lot money in one person not divided. Still lot

Thanks for coming to my ted talk

Also - didn’t say it made it impossible to develop a game. Nice go making weird assumptions, though.

irmoz,

You can do all that pirated too, no scavenging needed

irmoz,

You can show support without buying the game. Indie devs often have patreons or donation links these days

irmoz,

…yes, they do. Soooo many fucking games have that. There’s a whole genre of games built around it. They’re called survival games. A relevant example would be No Man’s Sky.

irmoz,

…what? I can’t tell if you’re trolling. Death is basically the most common failure state of any game.

irmoz,

Games aren’t real life??!

irmoz, (edited )

Yes, they do, just not for real. Why would you expect it to kill you for real? What an absurd standard. You’re supposed to be scared for your character’s life, not your own. They’re the one in space, not you…

Have you ever played games before?

irmoz, (edited )

And what you said was incorrect.

In RL most of the “excitement” in space comes from not wanting to fuck up and die. Games don’t have that, Todd.

So many games are all about the struggle to not fuck up and die, and they are plenty tense even though they don’t affect your real body. Ever played Subnautica? I’m not actually underwater but I’m scared of drowning.

I don’t know why the fact that a game can’t actually kill you doesn’t mean it can’t try to introduce tension.

Yeah, planets being barren is shit and realism is a shit excuse for it, but it’s kinda irrelevant to your “games don’t have dying” point, which would apply even if planets were designed better

irmoz, (edited )

Again with this bizarre obsession with games killing people… did you just finish watching Stay Alive?

No, that is not the reason games need to be interesting. No ove ever wanted games to kill people, dude.

irmoz,

Games have fear of death the same way films and books do.

It’s fiction.

It’s not real.

We are already aware of this.

Idk why this needs to be explained to you.

irmoz,

Of course it makes sense. That’s just how games work. You’re pretending you’re in space, and even though you aren’t actually running our of oxygen, your character is. You feel tension for your character.

Y’know playing COD doesn’t mean you’re actually at war, right?

irmoz,

I think you missed the point, lol. Obviously COD isn’t a remotely realistic portrayal of war. You haven’t understood a thing if you seriously thought I was saying that.

But we weren’t discussing realism of mechanics, rather, realism of environment. And the environments are pretty true to life.

It’s the mechanics that make a game fun. Not necessarily the environments. Though they of course help. Fun mechanics are what a game is about.

Such as… survival mechanics!!

irmoz,

Are you gonna now pretend that survival mechanics were your idea all along lol?

irmoz,

I see you tactically ignored the point and instead resorted to juvenile insults. Easier to do and makes you feel good.

Look into survival games sometime. They’re fun. Minecraft is a good one.

irmoz,

Dude MTX are all over solo games too, what are you smoking

irmoz,

I think you’re missing the point. They’re just saying the incentive structure of capitalism doesn’t necessarily encourage the best types of games. We see this with borked EA launches, predatory MTX, loot boxes, battle passes, etc

  • Wszystkie
  • Subskrybowane
  • Moderowane
  • Ulubione
  • rowery
  • Blogi
  • muzyka
  • slask
  • nauka
  • sport
  • giereczkowo
  • Spoleczenstwo
  • lieratura
  • antywykop
  • Psychologia
  • fediversum
  • motoryzacja
  • FromSilesiaToPolesia
  • Technologia
  • test1
  • Cyfryzacja
  • tech
  • Pozytywnie
  • zebynieucieklo
  • krakow
  • niusy
  • esport
  • kino
  • LGBTQIAP
  • opowiadania
  • turystyka
  • MiddleEast
  • Wszystkie magazyny