Why are people who make and develop games so disconnected from reality?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Why are people who make and develop games so disconnected from reality?
Why are people who make and develop games so disconnected from reality?
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Because you need to dedicate yourself to it, you end up playing less games, thus understanding less about what players would want.
Surely the solution to this is testers. Why don't devs listen to testers? Or do testers also have a problem?
>Or do testers also have a problem?
Their problem is there are only two kinds:
>the bug testers who spend their time jumping at walls instead of worrying what the game is like
>the morons randomly picked off the streets like the Half Life 2 play tester that got stuck walking in a loop, or the Thief tester who got stuck because a guard told him he can't enter an area he was supposed to go.
Modern gamedev work cycles fundamentally do not have the time for QA testers to actually Assure Quality. Testers barely get enough time to find all the game-breaking hardware-bricking bugs in time for release.
Wouldn't having a pool of testers deemed to be the projected audience for a type/genre of game ensure that QA is better, overall more productive, and in the end worth the cost? You then have testers that worry what the game is like, and you have feedback tailored for the game you're developing which makes the game design better which makes sales better?
So from where do game devs conceive the idea or general outline for a game, if not the clients? Do they just pick at random? Follow market trend?
Product A: Works well, sells by word of mouth as much as advertising, and improves the reputation of the seller
Product B: Sells well through advertising initially but doesn't work, generating bad press, sales fizzle after initial release
Why is product B always their choice?
>Why is product B always their choice?
Because they can shit out another one a year later, pay the shills to infect everyone with fomo and the cycle repeats.
It's why I only make small little games for my friends
I'm not a businessman, but if I were I would be just as concerned with the longevity of my business as its quarterly statement. I would have assumed that people from the top down in these companies feel similarly. In the long term it's more money, better reputation, better legacy to design good products that sell well than bad products that cycle out faster. Do none of these people care about any of that? Like a get rich quick scheme, they're selling vacuums and makeup to old people?
Yes, because when you effectively have control over all human communication you can perpetually trick people into buying shit they don't want provided it's just mainstream enough.
>Do none of these people care about any of that?
No, capitalism makes it more lucrative to chase the quick buck
>Capitalism
Shut up moron
>noooooo you can't say that noooooo
Cope
Yes anon, you can't use marxist rhetorical devices to try and ascribe issues with a corrupt market acting in the way it does.
Especially given the fact that this shit is genuinely only really possible as a result of the government and corporate unification for social regimentation of society, which is a marxist view of economy.
>with a corrupt market acting in the way it does.
Hmmm I wonder why the corporations are corrupt in a market with regulations that favor corporations hmmm
Because the corporate unification with the state and ultimately these labels are meaningless while moronic commies reinforce this behavior by demanding more unification of the state and corporate.
>The answer to fixing corporate corruption is less regulations on corporations
conservatards are a joke
Yes you stupid homosexual, when the government can't pick and choose favorites and use legislation that isn't enforced on corporate associations you end up with less corruption because competitors don't have their hands tied to their foot.
Europe has stricter corporate regulations and less corporate corruption than the US, so no that isn't true lmao
>Europe
>Less corporate corruption than the US
nice funny
He's technically right, but it's like saying you're more likely to drown in the Pacific Ocean than the Atlantic Ocean because the Pacific has more water.
You end with oligo/monopolies instead, which are somehow worse in all regards
Black person legitimate roles of government is very very brief list.
Keep sucking that corpo/government wiener bro. Its working and things are definitely getting better and not worse!
HE'S RIGHT. EAT SHIT AND DIE, STUPID.
>Posts government regulations being used to crush the citizen as a argument against the removal of regulation
--YES
YES YOU DUMBFRICK
Yeah the problems are billions in special tax breaks, bailouts and gov fundings, not welfare for workers
There's no functional difference between subsidizing a corporation though special tax breaks, bailouts, or government funding, and subsidizing a corporation by giving money to its workers who would otherwise not be able to afford working underpaid for that corporation.
Because those things are not bad on their own but that they are entertwined with big business the entire body is poisoned.
The reason why corporations are so corrupt in the US is because of the mixed economy bullshit that resulted in corperate socialism. Unironically the government meddling fricked everything.
correct.
And here's what else, dumbass.
Government destroyed the black family as well.
The fatherlessness and riots you see now? LBJ did it.
Negative incentive structures are destroyers of worlds.
>inadvertently
I agree, it probably was completely advertent by some people involved. But it would only ever work out if enough people believed it would do any good.
frick off
Salty b***h. Do you resemble that remark?
Black folk destroyed Black folk
I hate him so much, bros
Yes?thats the point
For the market to be truly corrupted, it is not by the hand of the people but by other authorities that can enact upon it.
See
The role of the government in the economy should be to
1. Enact universal standards on business that wish to be a part of their market.
2. Utilize taxed income to provide upkeep on general works, pay for people to provide oversite on business to make sure that standards are actually being met, and to solve public concerns such as menially ill and the
homeless.
Really a solid 70% of problems could be solved if the idea of corporations as "persons" was overturned, a stricter limit on donation amounts, and after investigation a removal of any politician that breaks there rules.
Well, yeah part of the whole reason Corporate personhood exists is to circumvent conspiracy crimes.
Dodge v Ford Motor Co.
Elaborate.
Surely an intelligent yet entirely hypothetical business development executive could keep that in mind and take strides to make sure that doesnt happen?
Something else I think is being overlooked is that many of these business don't start out bad but become like that when they become publicly traded.
What I have seen is that opening your company up is a Faustian bargain that gives a company the necessary capital to make larger scale projects but will kill a company in the long term. Mostly by replacing everyone who is competent and actually cares over time with more and more "business men" who will burn all goodwill garnered beforehand to drain as much profit out of it before letting scavengers pick at the desiccated remains.
You can be a business genius but letting your stock be publicly traded is a slow but invadable death.
>business don't start out bad but become like that when they become publicly traded.
Yes, that's another aspect of capitalism.
Sometimes internal QA teams are kept completely separate from the developers to the point that they're asked to not speak to or socialize with each other at all and only communicate via an intermediary.
No, it doesn't actually work at all and just makes the QA members depressed when they can't directly report critical issues or discuss their findings.
>and just makes the QA members depressed
Good. QA are not devs. They are not fit to share the same air as a dev much less speak to them directly. They should stop pretending they are part of game development. 90% of what they tell us we already fricking know. We just haven't gotten around to fixing it yet.
10% is still a big number.
>Elaborate.
Not that anon but I looked it up
>Dodge v. Ford Motor Company, 204 Mich. 459, 170 N.W. 668 (Mich. 1919)[1] is a case in which the Michigan Supreme Court held that Henry Ford had to operate the Ford Motor Company in the interests of its shareholders, rather than in a charitable manner for the benefit of his employees or customers. It is often taught as affirming the principle of "shareholder primacy" in corporate America, although that teaching has received some criticism.[2][3] At the same time, the case affirmed the business judgment rule, leaving Ford an extremely wide latitude about how to run the company.
So basically - when you're the CEO you aren't working to make your company better, UNLESS that aligns with the goals of the shareholders (which hopefully it should); you're working for said shareholders, who above all else what a return on their investment. A HIGH return.
Suits aren't human, don't try to apply human logic to their decision making.
Producing an actually good game is required for product A and that's not only a lot of hard and smart work but not always achievable for anyone. The product B model can be used as a crutch.
>So from where do game devs conceive the idea or general outline for a game, if not the clients?
Depends. There's plenty of small dev teams who make their own ideas into actual vidya.
You have streamers and youtubers for that. Obviously don't get RTS ecelebs to play JRPG shooters
>Why is product B always their choice?
nice cash influx during the fiscal year, or even quarter, that the game is released in. looks good to investors. they can just repeat it again later.
>looks good to investors
>investors
This. This is the reason for everything. The true driving force behind every decision in major media. This is all that matters. Customers are tertiary at beat, marketing will assure someone will buy product. Only investors are relevant, followed shortly by capital
Well yeah, it costs a metric frickload of money, people, time and equipment to make those AAA games, which is why they're always looking for investors and scrounging up funding in any way they can.
Normalgays don't like non-AAA games, so that system has to stay where it is until when/if normies finally lose interest in gaming entirely and it goes back to being a "weirdo nerd hobby" where all the games are made by less than 10 people crammed in a garage.
Anon's post is more an observation about how unspecific and vague clients are. You gotta remember how stupid the average person is and remember that's the average, so there's people more stupid than that. Artists, coders, whatever, constantly hear how inept customers/commissioners are with what they want.
You'd be lucky to get
>I want X like [example]
more likely to get "I want [rambling vagueries]"
"Not like that"
"Not like that"
"Not like that"
There was a time when I kept up with ~~*Mark Rosewater*~~'s blog. He described one time he was watching some live market research.
>Rando brought in off the street.
>He's handed a pack of MTG cards.
>The idea is to watch him open them and gauge his reaction as he looks at the cards. If they've done their job right he should be intrigued by the art and other designs.
>Man fiddles with the pack for a few minutes.
>Can't get it open.
>Puts it back down and sits there with his arms crossed.
Or for a vidya example. I recall reading a cover story for Epic Mickey in cuck Informer back in the day.
>Originally there was a morality system that made could make Mickey monstrous.
>Rando off the street gets brought in to gauge his reactions as well.
>This was a burly biker dude.
>Was genuinely upset to see Mickey depicted in such a way.
>Morality system was either scrapped or changed a lot. Don't remember, didn't play lmao.
system was either scrapped or changed a lot. Don't remember, didn't play lmao.
You can make choices but they dont do anything besides giving collectable a or b
To be fair, it was Disney who got super butthurt about the mouse looking evil first. The tester was brought in to see if they did a good job on the idea to have abuse of thinner make him "thin" his own paint
basically its a job that doesnt pay well and so only bums take the position. I was a bug tester for like 4 months.
Fricking moronic kids smoked weed in the bathroom. Its just not a really professional industry. Usually done by 19 year olds and fat losers that like star wars
Would it be a good investment to develop a department in a company dedicated to better QA? Make it more professional?
The issue is that the more you formalize the position and integrate it into the company, the less it can provide an external perspective that isn't prey to the same ruts in thinking as the designers.
Same for Dishonored, just like how I take IT calls for people who won't troubleshoot they just yell over the phone nothing changed and the world is impding when they disabled a setting on their computer.
>the Thief tester who got stuck because a guard told him he can't enter an area he was supposed to go.
Didn’t this happen with Dishonored?
>>the bug testers who spend their time jumping at walls instead of worrying what the game is like
You're dumb, edge cases that require tedious work to discover are exactly why testers are hired.
Q&A consists of bughunting which leads to very little time to actually play through the games and prototypes thrown their way. Focus group testing and market testing the consists of literal morons, average sub 90 IQ average Joes because owners and board wish to sell the product to everyone. Also these focus group supervisors are not actually the developers, but instead outsourced or consultants. Hence you might find a disconnect of the testers experience and how it's reported. Case example from few years ago when someone was playing a proto, noticed he might be advancing story by performing an action and went back to explore side areas. Even after explaining his reasoning, the supervisor reported it as "situation is confusing, testers wander around".
TL;Dr: the whole system is fricked up and no one actually knows how playtesting should be performed, supervised and reported, and focus group analysis targets and caters to fricking cavemen.
I remember that thread too. That was depressing, the tester clearly wanted to get optional collectibles and the supervisor made fun of him for it until the tester just went along with it.
It’s too depressing. I got a new job (not vidya industry) but it’s in an old-fashioned industry. I have to agree with whatever stupid choice the bosses want or else I get a two hour lecture or fired. they continuously make the most braindead decisions. I’m literally cutting the lawn with scissors but in the end I just get my paycheck. I guess this is the vidya industry too.
Let’s say you do programming and computer science. Any other industry than vidya will be much less stressful with far higher pay. It’s too bad, and I guess talent easily leaves. I had friends working in vidya doing actual programming not just qa, but there were way too many barriers. In Montreal you have Ubisoft, but unless you speak French you cannot get promoted. In Vancouver you have Capcom West, but you cannot get promoted unless you speak Japanese. Work at a regular company as a programmer and you can just speak English and get promotions normally.
After taking a massive shit, I have few additions, some of which are already mentioned in the thread. Modern AAA QA is severely understaffed, under budgeted and in general is seen as a burden. This has multitude of reasons, mostly because it's seen as burger flippers of the games industry, so the grunts of QA are juniors, interns, and they have way too few seniors who has experience in testing, reporting and process management. Outsourcing the tools, processes and testing supervisors is rather common. There has also been increasing mentality stemming from f.e. Agile and DevOps practises have brought along the mentality that "Release" is not final, as you should anyways aim for smaller dev cycles, faster releases, constant patching etc. etc. What you actually release to the store shelves is not the final product, so minor issues, bugs, critical issues and what not might be moved down the priority list as "day 1 patch will fix this". If QA is busy, devs are busy, this might cascade into major gameplay issues as well and not just bugs. Also some corpos think crowdsourcing bughunt and finding issues to consumers, streamers and fanatic fans is viable business strategy to cut down costs even more in QA.
As said, everything is fricked. Smaller teams and "indie" (the actual indie scene not the twitter circlejerk) fare a bit better when the dev team themselves perform some of the testing and outsource it to their friends who are usually "gamers" or at least enthusiasts and have played vidya.
>and no one actually knows how playtesting should be performed, supervised and reported
I mean, its not that hard.
>dev plays the game
>none of that incessant endless jumping at the wall
>just normal playthrough
>takes notes of bugs, errors, issues that happen in said playthrough
>compiles notes into the list or consolidates notes with other devs who did same (but with variations)
>team corrects the issues
You dont even need oversight and supervision for most of it.
Its like taking a car for a test drive and just noting down the issues like lights not working, something rattling, display not working or acting up etc.
I think its not even the system issue. Its just a people issue - too many incompetent or deluded people in top/leading positions who lack common sense.
>I mean, its not that hard.
Oh believe me it is. To loan your analogy a bit, you are not actually taking _a_ car to testbench, you might be taking 16, most are missing tires and steering wheel and the test report needs to be on boss's desk yesterday so you might be inclined to skip checking if the blinkers run in sync or if the proto cars are leaking oil for the rest of the 12 protos and you're pretty sure your testers Juan and Jameson O'Keef are huffing from Aircan at the employee restroom. You're also wondering where the frick they found Jameson and how he's qualified for the work. You also don't have a clear cut view on which basis you're supposed to give passing grade as you never have seen the safety standard list (might not even exist but your collague keeps insisting it's on the self next to the employee rest room, you've never seen it there).
The whole developmental work and processes around it are massive mess. I know few hardlocking bugs made it into final official release because they were fixed in dev/experimental branch which had feature which got scrapped and the fix was never backported to master.
There is literally zero time for that dude. Devs are already working around the clock and you can't just pause everything take people off the team and have them play through everything you have and only then start back to work after they finish.
People who play games make soulless shit like undertale where everything is plagiarism or homage to something else.
youre deeply moronic
nah that's actually (you), the other anon is right though.
This, anime became garbage when it started being made by anime fans, now the whole media is just repeating the same tired tropes ad noseum
moronic argument. A good developer gets into developing games AFTER he's already had a huge library of games played
Being inside all the time devving, and jerking off to porn as stress relief at the end of every day
let's see your game anon
I don't have one, anon. But I'm also connected to reality. More or less.
then why are you replying to yourself
Meds
>you need to know how a car is manufactured to know when it doesn't work
You Will Never Release A Game
Now let's see Paul Allen game
because it has become a process that involves hundreds and the original vision gets lost along the way
this
games end up being a mountains of shitty compromises between everyone but decided by noone and everyone knows its shit but cant really do anything about it without it just going to shit in a different way
https://lizengland.com/blog/2014/04/the-door-problem/
Making a game is a lot like building a house. It's a team and management effort that requires everyone to at least stick to the big picture but if your contractor is shit as his job, doesn't understand shit OR worse yet, ignores the client then everything else will just be shit.
>the user (client) ever being specific about what they want and how they want it achieved
lol
lmao
the client is very specific about what he doesnt want
I wish. I had this motherfricker who changed his mind about who or how data was seen or accessed every other week. 3 years later the program I made was an abomination as specified by said moron, and I know it was never used because the same idiot asked me 5 years later how to use it because he forgot.
I, of course, blocked him.
That's sad on every level and I'm not giving you a 'based' for that last part, and I resent you for clearly baiting it.
I don't know what you want from me, anon. I spent 3 years of my life listening to that idiot, and I reached a point where I would rather cut ties than get an ulcer trying to explain to him his own thought process. No, he could not be bothered to read the manual I wrote for him back then.
Besides, the pay was really bad, so no reason to give him one second of my time.
Why do you indulge in your own misery so much you lonely moron?
client spotted
Nice try anon but if you weren’t so pathetic you’d filter people out before they even waste your time.
>thinks im the same anon
schizo spotted
It applies to anybody who would be offended by the sort of question I asked lmao
>thinks im offended
nonce spotted
(You)
chinky spotted
There is nothing more hideous than a nose drawn by a typical westerner.
Lol what about a Chinese person? They’re pretty hideous. Face like a frying pan lol
this is the dumbest comic he's ever made
most popular band ARR ROOK SAME chinky ching chong OHHH HERRO soulless black eyes and same haircut, not even the slightest bit westernized
As a flip myself I hate this fricking homosexual and his shitty goddamn comics. Fricking Fil-Ams always cry about 'muh identity' and it only pisses me off.
Josh Luna's entire personality revolves around his victim complex. He's like a constantly crying adult male and its repulsive
>Reddit x family
Go back
>lol ah you know bro just do a thing like they normally are nbd it's all good i'm not too picky
>what the frick is this this isn't what i specified at all do everything over none of this can be reused it's all cursed
>how do i want it?
>just do a thing like they normally nbd it's all good i'm not too picky
Depends on what era of design philosophy you fall into.
Tip OP: Tons of people design games to be shilled by paid advertising on twitch and youtube that try to fomo people into "communities" that don't even exist.
It's more stable than trying to make a game that's actually fun because traditional advertising is a dead artform and if you try to make a game stand on it's own it has to compete with virtually every game ever released
they dont go outside
Game dev is the biggest waste of time on earth and somehow makes traditional animation look like a sane use of your life. You can do literally anything else on earth better with less hours spent.
What are the first five metaphors for please spoon feed me
Sponsors propose ideas that have nothing to do with reality or market needs but sound cool in their head.
Specifications aren't sufficiently precise.
Senior Analyst misses the obvious problem.
Programmers make shit that doesn't work.
The work of programmers is then hackjobbed into something that just barely functions.
Game dev (and all software dev big enough to not be manageably by one single person with comprehensive knowledge of every part) involves multiple people. First the requisite analist talks to the client to see what he wants, but the client is often clueless about what he really wants, having just a vague idea, or wants impossible/prohibitively expensive things for what he is paying. Then the analist designs a high level “roadmap” for the project, that is divided in tasks that are assigned to programmers to code. If there is time(lol), prototypes are made and shown to the client to validate if that is what he wants. When the application is mostly done, things are tested and if there is enough time and money left (lol), iterated over until the results are the desired ones.
Now imagine instead of a single client with a definite vision, as vague as it may be, you deal with a full board of suits changing opinions daily over focus group results, or that you have 50 teams of programmers to coordinate, or that the analysis or requisite elicitation had mistakes, or...
In most cases, thing is so frickhuge and people are so lazy and stupid (including not only devs, also the client) that coordinating everything is almost impossible. Mistakes WILL propagate downwards the development cycle until it is too expensive in time or money to fix.
Hey, this isn't a coom thread, a nintendo thread, a jap thread, or a fotm thread
MODS
The request was clearly something like "I want to swing/hang from the tree by a rope attached to the middle". Ambiguous and confusing. And largely the fault of the person making the request
The problem is not bringing the right people into the meetings to be able to ask questions.
>you need to be over 25 to play this game
anyone have the original?
>gore
dead island collectors edition
bump
Wow haha
>are videogames good for you?
>Are plants in videogames cool?
>post plant vidya characters
billion dollar AAAA company vs anon with 3 minutes in photoshop
What do tree boobs feel like, bros?
wood
>kasumi_rebirth.flv
sauce?
i dont get it
The main issue with game development is thus:
1) Having to appeal to multiple platforms.
2) Having to please investors.
3) Having to please danger hair weirdos on twitter.
4) Leadership in game dev studios are not gamers, or have never played videogames.
>4) Leadership in game dev studios are not gamers, or have never played videogames.
But how does this part happen?
Where do these skinsuits come from?
They're businessmen
They get hired to make profits, not be creative
Still doesn't really answer my question though, does it?
Look at Bethesda. They got acquired by Zenimax. Zenimax cares for nothing but profits. Thus why you got TES Online and FO76 and other such bullshit.
Yes? I told you why they get hired
Even people that this board loves to suck off, like Reggie, never developed a video game. Reggie was in charge of fricking Pizza Hut before he was hired by Nintendo
Other Markets like the packaging, or food processing industry.
They are brought in by shareholders because they are "their guys" and can be relied upon to prep companies for the slaughter.
The exception that proved the rule was Reggie with Nintendo who actually cared beyond raw profit and even then her had NoJ tempering him.
Fight with each other, now.
I refuse to fight one who I agree with even the Reggie portion is not mutually exclusive just different aspects of the same things with different tones.
What? Are you stupid?
You're opposed. Now fight, c**t.
>company gets bought out/publicly traded
>shareholder liches vote to install money guy who will ensure money goes up
>money guy makes plenty of room up top for more money guys
>guys who like making games leave to make their own studio, eventually the system starts again
Contrary to popular belief, a lot of people nowadays doing grassroots work & management etc. are people doing 9-5. It's no longer a passion industry in the AAA side.
What you're suggesting is popular belief, isn't.
We know it's shit but what I don't know is how there's still so many people who have never played any fricking video games. It seems like the most difficult thing to avoid doing in the modern age.
As for any hobby, for most adults there isn't that much time nor interest to become enthusiasts is you weren't one as a kid. I don't play that much either anymore, work, life, and other hobbies very quickly eat into your daily time budget. I don't even have time to invest into counter strike anymore, nor have I been able to follow the releases and output of the industry in general. I mostly just see the behind the scenes stuff time to time but that's sort of besides the point. And just like ten years ago, video games as a hobby is not that sexy, adjacent things are, like vidya politics, vidya "analysis", confs, expos, etc. Which is fricking assbackwards but it is what it is. Most normies also don't have that much contact point to video games outside what they see in public marketing, even for the kids. For most normies video games is the yearly AAA release, Fifa and NHL, throw in the random Halo, CoD, and nowadays a Bethesda release but that's pretty much it.
>video games as a hobby is not that sexy
Oh. have a nice day.
For phrasing things like this, even in your head.
have a nice day dude.
If you can't make the distinction between having something as your core hobby versus consuming a product of a media time to time, I don't know what to say to you. You seem to be the one who needs to go out and touch grass anon. Or meet and socialize with people outside your bubble.
Video Games had to chase more and more advanced graphics, so they take longer and cost more money to make. This results in the publishers staffing studios with more suits who don't understand anything.
Project manager here.
Never understood those meme tree images.
Even if the client is a moron you just need to have a good fricking team, and clear goals and you won't run into any of those problems.
Its a meme for shitty reddit programmers who copy 80% of their work from GitHub and rely on senior staff to carry them.
Yeah, I always thought this tree analogy was really Jr. stuff.
In big projects, you can't afford to make those amateur mistakes.
also project manager here and I am of the same opinion. I work in heavy industry though and not programming.
>Even if the client is a moron you just need to have a good fricking team, and clear goals and you won't run into any of those problems.
I see two failure points in your thesis where AAA game dev fails to measure up, wanna guess what they are
?t=49
IT'S MISTER LIZARD!!
IT'S MISTER LIZARD!!
IT'S MISTER LIZARD!!
How do you apply to become a game tester? Sounds like the best job in the world.
According to some anecdotes in this thread, be vaguely near the building and don't look too drunk.
Also be utterly, UTTERLY fricking moronic about video games
perfect job for Ganker then
HA CHA CHA
GOOD ONE DAD
?t=7
For gamedev if you fall for the "the consumer doesn't know what they want" meme then you are doomed to making some soulless shit like Diablo Immoral, and then you will pat yourself on the back after the morons actually buy into it.
The prevailing thought by accomplished developers that made timeless classics is to "give the players something they didn't know wanted."
There is some logic to the argument that if the consumer did actually know what he wanted, he wouldn't be a fricking consumer in the first place, they would be developers themselves. Ultimately the developers job is to give the audience what they need.
>you are doomed to making some soulless shit like Diablo Immoral
Or doomed to make the next indie phenomenon like FNAF.
>There is some logic to the argument that if the consumer did actually know what he wanted, he wouldn't be a fricking consumer in the first place
Uh..
That's like saying you can't have good taste in food unless you're an aspiring chef.
Food is a product, entertainment is a service.
Shut the unholy diagonal polkadotted serrated frick up.
>if the consumer did actually know what he wanted
i do.
>he wouldn't be a fricking consumer in the first place
Indeed, i am not.
>would be developers themselves
Dont have the necessary qualities for that specific role. Also, if i do develop my own game, i will lose interest in it due to me knowing its design and details. I like exploration and encounter with new.
>i will lose interest in it due to me knowing its design and details.
This is such a brainlet mentality used as an excuse to never learn anything
>No you don't understand, I CHOSE to be a sub 100 IQ moron, its just like, my philosophy bro
You're moronic. The guy you're replying to makes perfect sense. You can't surprise YOURSELF with a creation.
Have you ever created anything before? Why am I even arguing with you, there's a million artists out there that say otherwise, its like, the defining element of creative pursuits. Not only have you never made anything, you've never even interacted with anyone who's made anything.
>Have you ever created anything before
Yes. I've created comics. Many of them.
And I stand by what I just said, about what you said, about that guy's thesis.
>client architect sends us drawing for a 'state of the art' high-traffic warehouse
>getting it along, working on the foundation and services
>notice one of the lights in front of the doors should be an overhead attached to the facade, drawn as a full damn street light
>send in to the client, clearly a mistake
>architect argues with us, the drawing is perfect, it's supposed to be brighter there
>lmao ok, definitely not going to fight this one
>build up a HV cable under the slab, get the whole thing set up and installed
>right in front of a roller door
>ffw 6 months later about to hand over client is doing a inspection
>"why the frick is there a lamp post here? you can't even get into the building!"
>show him the design and our correspondence with his lead designer
>ends up having to pay us an extra $50k to rip out and 'dispose' of the pole and the UG cable (we sell em both for near full price), costs us $250 to get an electrician in and install a plain light fitting
>barely even used because the place closes up at 5pm
Ah, gotta love armchair architects. Those frickers ruin businesses and lives more often than people realize.
All architects are armchair architects. Get engineers on it or it just won't work.
I can't count how many people have argued with me over shit that would destroy their building in 10 years, but I guess that's why they went to art schools and not practical learning
Game development is an extremely complex and difficult field.
I've worked in mining, energy, construction, education and the military. I've built houses, managed multi-million dollar pilot projects, government departments and was even an officer on a warship. Of all these undertakings, nothing even comes close to the scope and complexity of video game development.
Player's don't appreciate how much blood, sweat and tears go into even the simplest video games.
Webm related: My game I've been working on 9 hours a day, every day for the past year.
Somehow I doubt your credentials
The game looks nice though
Needs another dimension
Yea you didn't need a list of all the things you've done to understand that video games are very complex moron. It takes every aspect of art and combines it into one, anyone with a brain can figure that out sherlock. Also your game looks barely fricking functional. But props for working hard, I'm sure it'll pull through.
NTA but weird approach to just shit on his game before saying good job.
>anyone with a brain can figure that out sherlock
>implying most people have a functioning brain
you poor thing
There's something uncanny about the dimensions of your game.
Is this a vampire survivors but with spaceships..?
Architects are the ones who came up with Black person shit like brutalism
Yeah those architects. Someone oughta stop them
This image is incorrect. "What the user wanted" should be "What the user needed" and then "What the user wanted" should be a gold plated and diamond encrusted 100% manufactured swing with the tree gone from the image.
Because it costs too much money to make
I make video games and I think I'm pretty down to earth in my craft. Pretty sure Ganker would think my taste in games is garbage and I have no idea what makes games good. Its all subjective.
You talk so normal and non-memey, I actually wanna hear about it.
When I'm shilling my game I turn off my controversial opinions for the sake of gladhanding people. But whenever I'm honest and anonymous in various threads, people always wanna get confrontational about it. You know, like I'll go into an Elden Ring thread and talk about how the combat is garbage, how Skyrim and Bethesda in general can't do proper RPGs, how shit like Overwatch is bottom of the barrel FPS trash. Remember, talking shit about popular games is "shitposting" and wrongthink on this board.
What's your opinion on Breath of Fire?
None, unfortunately. The pixel art looks great but I've never played the games.
I don't really have controversial opinions, but I get called out for shilling even when it's related to the topic and the game is free in browser lol.
I don't think there's anything wrong with what you're doing but that webm quality is ass.
yeah, sorry, it was so I can post the game but it's kinda unrecognizable.
hey I know that game, it looks awesome
thank you, it's actually live in the /agdg/ demoday
https://pricklypeargames.itch.io/warmitzler
I've been working on a wave function collapse for trying to generate more maps probably not going to happen, but the results have been interesting.
>Skyrim and Bethesda in general can't do proper RPGs, how shit like Overwatch is bottom of the barrel FPS trash
Are these not commonly held opinions?
Those are all correct opinions. I still think Morrowind is a great RPG though.
>What the user wanted
That's pretty inaccurate. The user always wants something impossible.
>I want elden ring again but different, but with all the same stuff I already like from the first game
Because I had an ashole producer ask me to completely change the control scheme of a godamn rythm game 6 fricking time in a row.
I had to scrape it, redo it, redo UI for it, show it to him and listen as he explain that he would like to see it done another way.
I've had "game designers" dictate that basic unit should deal 1 damage. Then tell me that we should have a buff that increases that by 50%. But all damage should be in integers.
I am tired. I am so tired.
do you think there can be no such thing as a good game designer?
thanks doc
I think being against regulations is by far the most moronic stance a conservative can take.
Regulations are ALWAYS better for the end user. The only people who seethe about them are company owners because they cut into the money they could be making by forcing them to actually put effort into what they do.
If you want a market with no regulations, you just have to go back to the 19th century and see what it was like
>fire hazard electrical setups
>companies dumping waste into rivers
>children losing hands working on huge machines
>children getting black lung working in coal mines
>children getting blown up in coal mine explosions
>electrical cable management in cities blocking out the skies
>companies hiring gunmen to kill striking employees
>the fricking titanic not having enough lifeboats for everyone on board
Anyone who thinks regulations are bad is literally mentally moronic. You cannot convince me otherwise.
>companies hiring gunmen to kill striking employees
this one's based though
Some regulations are backed by competing businesses looking to kill another industry so it can swoop in with its alternative product. Like banning the use of specific materials in the construction of a product. This isnt banning products with that material just the use in factories in the states. Entire factories and jobs gone because Jim Prim on the west coast couldn't complete on the east coast with his imported slave labor made products.
Which is why thee is such a concept as conflict of interest. And government should always be looking for conflict of interest before adopting regulations.
>You cannot convince me otherwise
No point in arguing with you then.
You are stupid however, to think government is the only way problems can be fixed.
>companies hiring gunmen to kill striking employees
Murder is already illegal.
... You really think there aren't bigger fish to fry at that point?
its a bigger crime than murder. Not even from an ethical point of view, its a completely different class of crime.
Drivel.
Even in 1 on 1 homicide, the crime changes depending on if its premeditated or not. That's not drivel thats literally the way the legal system works.
>how it works
>appeal to authority
>murder isn't just murder... it's uh... super murder?
This moronic tangent started with this post
If you don't care about legal definitions then why even bring up the fact that murder is illegal in the first place?
Murder is not only illegal, it commands justice just by being. And justice doesn't change with the law.
But since the law is all you give a frick about, I brought it up.
Yeah what this guy said:
You're talking absolute SHIT appealing to the letter of the law that I don't necessarily respect to begin with. So what's it mean to me?
Murder and assassination are two different crimes, is this not correct? Murder is often meant explicitly for this one person, or the victim was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Assassination is not just about killing the man. It's about killing what he stood for, and telling others, "this will be you, too, if you do as he did." Assassination is not merely murder, it is the enforcement of an ideas on a world that would otherwise not have it. It is silencing people. It is far above mere murder.
No, assassination includes murder.
murder is just assault with a deadly weapon with extra steps, no need to have a different term for making someone die
As I said.
Fricking. Drivel.
yeah not like this eloquent post, right
bump
>Murder committed for hire, without provocation or cause of resentment given to the murderer by the person upon whom the crime is committed.
The legal definition sounds like the exact opposite of what you're saying.
>It's not murder
>It's SUPER murder
I bet you're one of those fricking morons that support hate crime escalations of charges.
It's not murder if the company accuses them of being communist first. Welcome to Capitalist States of America, where strikes are broken with air raids.
Government usurped the authority of violence from the people. Now if you're unhappy about a company, you can't just go burn it down, thats illegal! No, now you have to vote someone in who will go and burn it down for you. Ridiculous.
>No, now you have to vote someone in who will promise to burn it down for you but won't because they're in the companies' pockets
fixed
>children losing hands working on huge machines
>children getting black lung working in coal mines
>children getting blown up in coal mine explosions
Wait are we supposed to care solely because they're children?
If it happens to adults, who cares?
And people could buy a house and maintain a family of five with car with the salaries, truly hell on earth
Most chinked up post in the thread so far
I wont live in the pod zog
>this whole thread
People should watch/read more Dilbert
Someone post the author image
i thought bottom middle was a uterus from the thumbnail
1. Most professional big-studio gamedevs don't actually play that many games, or aren't even that interested in them, in terms of actually *playing* them.
2. Most of said people don't have time to play games, even if they ARE a gamer, so they pretty much just own a bunch of merch, and play their [CURRENT GEN CONSOLE] an hour a day at most.
3. Even if the staff likes games and plays them, most publishers don't give a shit and will just focus-test with randos until the game loses all sense of identity.
4. Most game devs are left-wing AND live+work in a huge hyper-urban city somewhere, surrounded by other leftoid goblins who don't actually interact with anyone outside their cliques. Between the people they work with/around, and the shithole fairylands they live in, it's no wonder they have no grip on reality.
5. Idea guys are a dime a dozen, and some are loud/charismatic/important enough that they step in and change shit just because.
what are some good right-wing games
By today standards?
Deus Ex
>words, the game
lmao
Yeah. The right wing has a monopoly on the facts and they're all dry and boring. No wonder the left manages to exist, they peddle all the fun lies.
Disco Elysium is extremely similar but gets shit on this board all the time for being "too many words". I wouldn't even call the philosophies espoused in Deus Ex right wing by any measure in any time period. It has a very strict "government bad" slant, which for some reason, pisses off conservatives even though they hate the government too.
> It has a very strict "government bad" slant, which for some reason, pisses off conservatives
Uh, does it? I'm really having trouble picturing it.
if you criticize the government, you're a commie
Never had that experience. Conservatives hate government. Non-RINOs want their own positions to wither and die so they can do something else.
Its entirely /misc/'s angle and you see it crop up here constantly. The fact that Deus Ex depicts rich people in a bad light is automatic grounds for labeling it as lefty propaganda in their view. I find it extremely hard to believe you're this much of a classical republican but still browse this website enough to not know how memey the political position has gotten on the internet.
>Its entirely /misc/'s-
Aahpapap.
I don't go there and they don't represent anything.
Don't just go telling me about every random brigade of frickwagons.
You know this brand of psyop is incredibly cmon
>Well I dunno about all that bidness I'm just a honest card carrying humble 'publican tryna get a fair shake and deal for all men
Like dude I've seen this shtick before, its not original. At worst you're lying to get people on your side, and at best you're woefully naive of what your party is actually like in which case you're doing as much harm by pretending like nothing's wrong.
Enjoy your thread, fellas, I'm out.
>You know this brand of psyop is incredibly cmon
Oh is it? Is it that cmon? Sorry I didn't know it was that cmon. My bad.
>Like dude I've seen this shtick-
Skip. Don't give a frick.
>/pol/
>meaning both ironic and sincere neonazis
>Conservative
Ha ha, no.
He probably believes that nazis were actually right wing, and doesn't know what 'na' and 'zi' actually stands for.
This poster is Chinese lol
National Socialism.
Oh nevermind it’s just a moronic bot.
God damn you are completely devoid of wit. You just said random shit, what do you expect to happen? "THIS POSTER CHINESE" So I go "What, is this fricking moron mistaking the syllables for chinese?"
Find hell.
And jump in.
Don't come back.
>this entire post
Definitely a chink lol
It's worse than boring to repeat yourself.
Come up with something else.
>bot asking for a new string
Ask me politely, Chang.
Even beyond what qualifies as "left and right" wing a fricking moronic useless relativistic term which helps no one.
Nazis aren't conservative because much like confederates way back when slavery was abolished they object to literally the most basic simple principle in American tradition, individual liberty.
>chinks fumbling to explain employment and american politics
If you knew anything about either you wouldn’t be getting paid pennies on the dollar to post here.
>Even beyond what qualifies as "left and right" win-
Bored. Skipping this.
But at least you're not this feckless homosexual.
I accept your admission of defeat.
Concession, dumbfrick, the word you're thinking of is concession.
A concession is a form of admission, and you just made it
Correct, I did make it. You win!
>muh liberty
In your original(and best) Constitution only white men who owned land and were of good character could vote.
Slaves were slaves, and women knew they belonged in the kitchen.
Muh freedom is a spook that leads to trannies and israelites owning your country.
>Um george washington didn't go inga ginga boo and instantly remove slavery so that means it getting abolished has nothing to do with the constitution or the foundational values of the United States.
Ok moron
/misc/ here. He's right: we love all facets of the united states government, particularly the intelligence community.
>Conservatives hate government.
Lmao said the scorpion
Roflmao
>no true republican
yeah take a wild fricking guess who I have a problem with and who has control of (You)r party.
Ok Bernie Bro.
You're not interesting enough to reply to.
This is the one you're getting.
Your three ending options are:
>#1: Gov bad, burn down the entirety of modern civilization and start over
>#2: Gov bad, but I'm going to fix it from the inside and make it not bad
>#3: Gov bad, AI godhood is the only way to fix this mess
I can see it.
What's this moronic first option? Why would you need to burn anything down? Government doesn't own anything.
-I can already tell you're too dumb to absorb this next video, so this isn't really for you. Don't reply to me. I don't care.
?t=1761
And I cannot stress this enough: Do not reply to me. I don't care.
A third time just in case: Do not reply to me. I don't care.
Alright got it? It won't be read.
--Shit, a fourth time: Do not reply to me. I don't care.
Great, protagonist from Deus Ex, got any leads?
We should try word association.
First word: Ambrosia.
I've been up for 18 hours, frick you.
Unironically just walk (or drive) to your local businesses and ask if they're hiring, I make $3500 a month shoving boxes in trucks.
Sweet cash flow anon, are you going to leverage that against your impending medical expenses?
Sorry I'm not a female asian math teacher who applied for a side gig at amazon.
Yes it does, you just need to convince yourself to stop being a pussy and actually go in and ask.
>Yes it does,
No. It doesn't.
Frick off with the boomerisms.
It does not work like this anymore.
People try it and get immediately pissed off with how many people are just lying to them.
Then I guess I'm NOT going to go to work tomorrow, and NOT earn more money then?
-Are you moronic?
You got whatever job you got, through something other than what you're suggesting. You didn't have to do it. You just strongly assume that it works, and don't see the harm in propagating it.
>-Are you moronic?
You have to go back
Hey anon, you know what will absolutely 100%, and entirely ensure you will NEVER get a job ever?
Never bothering to try for one.
Hey anon, you know what else?
Bad advice is worse than no advice.
Ok ya bum
>sameBlack personing this hard
What’s with all the chink spammers lately? When are they going to just send them back to Chinese prison and get somebody smarter. Like Serbs or Indians .
No boomer, that doesn't work. They give you an annoyed look and tell you to look at their online applications. And if you don't have social media they discard you outright.
Jesus fricking christ.
There aren't any I can think of. Hardly any game dev/company is openly right-wing for a lot of reasons.
Plus, right-wing people tend to not give a frick as much about identity politics, slapping labels on everything and going around with 50 pins on their jackets about their interests.
I guess you could narrow it down based on which companies stay with their regular logos during Pride Month in all countries and not just the Middle East, then find who makes the best games within that group.
Yeah, half the time they have to just keep running the focus group testing over and over and over and over again until they get the results they wanted, because it costs way the frick less to hand some randos free doughnuts than it is to restructure half of a game, or swap out half the equipment in a factory or whatever.
You can't count on globohomosexual pandering too, even if a company is ran by people that are "right wing" they might pander to globohomosexual only because it is good for marketing, you please a gay minority but most importantly you please potential investors, and it is a very easy low effort thing to do, just put on a rainbow logo, insert 2 or 3 rainbow cosmetics, ramble about "inclusiveness" for a bit and now you can say that you have ""updated"" your game which will boost sales immediately. If you make your game openly "right wing" you will get very low investment (if any), then let's remember that getting to make it in the gamedev world is already very hard, so that is everything you need to make your decision, either screech about your political views in a game no one will buy or actually get your game to sell.
>focus-test
This shit needs to be done away with entirely.
As a kid I was in one of those. It was confusing and obnoxious and at the end I just wanted to give the "right" answers so I wasn't even honest.
They exist to give cause to investors that an idea "works" enough to shovel money into the project.
Focus tests are like airbags. They kill more than they save.
Devs aren't the problem.
Stakeholders pushing for monetization and lootboxes are a problem. Upper management failing to compensate (and subsequently losing) promising junior devs and experienced senior devs are a problem.
Game gets made -> senior devs get axed, move on to greener pastures or noncrunching fields-> Game: 2 gets greenlit-> junior devs and senior devs with no experience scramble to both learn how game 1 works and how to somehow make Game: 2 better -> Game 2 sucks
Devs are still a problem, because all the new blood in the past 10 years aren't autistic psychopaths who code for fun, they're normies trying to get a basic 9-5 job
Capitalism
indie devs arent that well either since artists are all fricking insane too
Alright, here’s the truth from a 40 year old boomer with 20 years of business experience.
It’s because of corporate politics, echo chambers, and risk averseness.
The producer who holds the money bag will want to be extremely conservative and risk averse with their product design because they want a return on investment, so they will want to bring something to the market that is very much like previous (financially successful) products. Hence why something like the iPhone couldn’t have happened outside of Apple.
In a corporate environment everything is designed by committee and everyone who is “important” will want to get something that *they* proposed to make it into the final product. Hence bloat and internal inconsistency.
Finally, echo chamber. This can apply to an entire industry. Like how Netflix et al live in a bubble with other streaming providers and their investors, so they thought everybody wants to watch woke trash.
>its another "thread about problems caused by capitalism" gets overtaken by /misc/tards and libertarians who cant comprehend how their system that demands infinite growth causes problems on a finite resource system
every fricking time
Oh, please anon, enlighten us how abolishing private ownership and corporate integration (which is what the government is currently doing and is the cause of 99% of the problem) won't result in a despotic tyranny collapse of the society and progression back to a free market again. THIS TIME!!
>if you dont like how things are currently and are complaining about them then you MUST be asking for these COMPLETELY INSANE AND UNREASONABLE things instead!
>Uses marxist rhetorical device of declaring the entire economic (and legal concept of ownership) system bunk
>Whines when people call him crazy
capitalism is flawed to the core but its not realistic to believe we'll get to change to a more ideal thing anytime soon, so the least we can hope for is changing it for something a bit more tolerable
Green energy, taxing the rich, beating up the electoral college, good urban planning focused on people, UBI. There are a lot of things people are fighting for that dont require society to be turned upside down and are actually practical or improvements to current things while still leaving both sides somewhat satisfied
of course, because the elite dont give a shit, knowing they'll be dead in ~30 years to suffer any consequences of what they're doing, all they want more profit, power and suffering of the lower classes, and they'll do whatever it takes to get there (paradoxically, on the laziest way possible too)
(small business owners arent the target of most leftist political groups by the way, they actually sympathize with them, that's still just the elite just snuffing out the middle and lower classes through class divide infighting)
wait, I'm on the videogame board, uh.... check out this cool page from the Armored Core 1 guide!
whats more ideal than capitalism?
Capitalism with extra steps in the places where it fricks up.
the post says "capitalism is flawed to the core"
The post I replied to actually said "whats more ideal than capitalism?" And I gave the best answer. I'm not the guy that wrote the mile-long drivel, I'm the guy who gave you a concise, correct answer.
I was addressing the guy in the post to try and get him to respond to his moronic claim
Did you read the post you originally responded to? You'll get nothing useful, just talking in circles.
Capitalism is flawed but good and needs checks, not replacing. Done.
>whats more ideal than capitalism?
Absolute religious monarchy.
Most problems stem from private megacorps bribing/lobbying their way around state safeguards to prevent monopolies and foul play.
A tentative approach could be some sort of AI inspector for every branch of government and big corpos. They would audit corpos and public administrations to prevent bribery and collusion, being unbribable themselves.
You can’t really let AI decide things because it is a disaster waiting to happen, but could act as a new branch of the division of powers. Also their security standards should be nuclear silo-tier to prevent tampering. And who makes those AIs, and how, should be scrutinized too to prevent favoritism towards the creator.
A difficult roadmap but honesly less insane than thinking humans will spontaneously defy their nature and the rulers of a new regime won’t become corrupt pieces of shit themselves, like literally happened every single time in human history.
You can't say captialism is flawed at its core and then suggest "capitalism with tweaks"
I’m not the same anon, you non-issue fixated idiot.
>you non-issue fixated idiot.
what the frick are you talking about?
I didn’t read your chain reply but you attacking “but you said” instead of being constructive adds nothing and make people like me, unrelated to “what that guy said”, waste time calling you a moron.
>I didn’t read your chain reply
Perhaps you're the moron then
>its not realistic to believe we'll get to change to a more ideal thing anytime soon, so the least we can hope for is changing it for something a bit more tolerable
so what's ideal?
thats not the point, the point is that "something ideal" is not realistic at all considering human nature
changing capitalism, little by little, into something a bit better for everyone is what we should strive to achieve instead
if you want me to just spell out "socialism" for you then whatever but that's not what I proposed in my post at all.
you said capitalism is flawed to the core. What is the flaw? If something doesn't take human nature into account then it's not ideal
Not him but if you want to sit there on this same question, the answer is that wealth (or the lack thereof) snowballs. It is a system based around private ownership of capital, and you succeed by leveraging the capital you own to obtain more. Unregulated, the people with the most capital have the greatest ability to hold onto and obtain more, and people with the least capital are least able to leverage capital to lift themselves up. I'm in the camp that it is still the best system, but I'm not a fricking idiot who can't understand the logical conclusion of its singular defining principle.
That's why you regulate it, give it "extra steps," ensure that there is generally some kind of floor that allows people who try to have a reasonable chance to financial mobility. Because people on top would not allow for that mobility if they could stop it. That's why regulations exist, because they take human nature into account. They're not perfect either but they're better than the alternatives. Take this answer and be satisfied or rattle on about dumb shit like the guy you're trying to pry answers out of.
>the answer is that wealth (or the lack thereof) snowballs
it doesn't have to
How do you avoid it without regulation?
how wealth snowballs depends on the other rules of your economy
What rules, exactly?
all of them
>the natural wealth snowball of capitalism doesn't have to exist
>through outside economic rules that hinder the function of capitalism to its logical conclusion
No fricking shit, moron. You're agreeing with me that capitalism is inherently flawed and requires regulation. I don't know why people have such a hard time swallowing this pill when rivers and lakes used to catch fire for days before basic economic regulation.
you're arguing with a whole lot of things I didn't say
The thing we are arguing about is capitalism.
"Other" rules in the economy means rules that are "other" to the thing we're arguing about. So rules outside of capitalism.
You said that wealth doesn't have to snowball, then said that how it does so depends on rules outside of capitalism.
SO, the thing keeping wealth from snowballing(or changing the way it does, per your second post) is regulation outside of capitalism, because it's "other" rules. You said almost fricking nothing, but you did say that. And that just agrees with my point.
>rules outside of capitalism
This doesn't mean anything
That's the best that the moron I replied to could do in response to how I actually addressed the flawed nature of capitalism's core defining principle. So take it up with him, assuming you aren't him.
You sound very angry about absolutely nothing
Your logic is flawed. You think capitalism is flawed because if you make everything as capitalist as possible, it would be bad. That's moronic. EVERYTHING is bad if overdo it. If I ate as much food as I possibly could, I'd become obese. Is eating fundamentally flawed?
>food analogy
of course
>Is eating fundamentally flawed?
not him, but, yes
>anon agrees with my post, the post
Every system is flawed because followed to its logical conclusion, you're gonna frick up. That's what being flawed means. Recognizing that and finding regulations outside the system is making up for those flaws.
>is eating fundamentally flawed?
A broccoli diet would be, even broccoli is in itself quite healthy. Just like a capitalism-only economy. Eating a balanced diet would be analogous to having an economy with proper checks and balances, if you have to force a food analogy here. People argue for as pure a capitalist society as possible, and are rightly called morons.
The logical conclusion of every system is not "apply this system to absolutely everything"
Where the hell did you get that idea
>where did you get that idea?
Logic, anon. A logical conclusion is based on specified premises, followed to the logical end. The premise here is the private ownership of capital. If you leverage capital to make more capital, then people who have more capital to begin with have more leverage and will take bigger shares, which will snowball their leverage. You can argue that that would not be the case, but either you would disagree with the natural flow of capital as I described it, which would be stupid, or you would try ti impose an outside rule that stops that natural flow. Which is what I said.
>The premise here is the private ownership of capital.
Yes
Not "we should turn everything possible into capital we can own"
Privately owning capital is not a fundementally flawed idea. It depends on the context.
If you want to limit what you can own as capital then you limit capitalism from the outside. Because whatever is useful economically is capital, and capitalism is the private ownership of capital. So you're welcome to limit it from outside the system, that's what I advocate for. I just don't pretend that it's not half-assing the principle of the economic system.
>If you want to limit what you can own as capital then you limit capitalism from the outside
Again you've decided that part of the definition of capitalism is you have to apply it to absolutely everything, which doesn't make any sense
Anon, you're adding that you can't own things to the definition. The only thing capitalism mentions about capital is that you CAN own it, not that you CAN'T.
>you're adding that you can't own things to the definition
No i'm not
My definition of captialism is "private ownership of capital"
Your definition is "private ownership of anything possible as capital"
And there's really no limit to that, you can always invent new things own, like NFTs
Things you don't want people to own, are capital. You just don't like that. If it's economically useful and you CAN own it, it's capital. You just think people shouldn't and that's your issue with the system. I agree because I have the same issue. But again I recognize that that's straying from capitalism.
>You just don't like that
>You just think people shouldn't and that's your issue with the system
What the frick are you talking about? It feels like you just want to have a discussion with a strawman, you're just putting words into my mouth over and over again
>what are you talking about?
The things you don't want people to own, are also economic capital. Capitalism is the private ownership of capital. I don't know how much more clearly I can explain it. If you don't understand why that's an issue with capitalism then I really am arguing with someone who has straw for brains.
You're arguing with something you made up in your head, you shouldn't call other people moronic if you make up a bunch of shit you assume they must think
People don't own air, or seawater. It's not economic capital, they COULD own it, but there are no laws that allow you to do so
>it's not economic capital
It becomes capital if it has economic value and someone could own it if they were allowed to. So yes, air and seawater are economic capital, anon. If you could own these things they would be worth a great deal. Since you think I put words in your mouth, tell me: do you think people should be able to own the air around us?
>It becomes capital if it has economic value and someone could own it if they were allowed to
>So yes, air and seawater are economic capital, anon
You just contradicted yourself
It's only capital if you can own it. You can't own it, so it's not capital
Different anon. Question. What defines what can be owned and what can not? Would that be some kind of rule and/or regulation?
the law
Okay, thanks. Now, if the law says that capitalism doesn't apply to something like, say, air, could you think of the law as a form of regulation over capitalism?
What's stopping us from owning it, anon? Is it capitalism, the system that says we can own capital, which air and seawater are? Or is it people pumping the breaks on the faithful application of that defining principle before it gets stupid?
And could you answer my question so I don't put words in your mouth: Do you think people should be able to own the air around us? In a capitalist sense, where it is your private property?
It's not capital because you can't own it. Capitalism is not some unstoppable force of nature. Capitalism just means private ownership of capital. Capitalism does not mean absolutely everything must be ownable any more than me being a dog owner means I have to own every single dog in the universe. We're just going around in circles here. Your other quesiton is irrelevant
>if the law says that capitalism doesn't apply to something like, say, air
It doesn't. Laws are created so you can own things. Laws aren't created so you can't own things, because ownership is a legal concept
Oh, inclusive laws over exclusive, got it. My bad there then. Means I need to rephrase the question - since the law determines what can be owned, and Capitalism is about ownership of those things, does this mean the law regulates Capitalism? If yes, then you and that other anon are probably agreeing with but talking past each other.
>Update
you're not saying much compared to him, to be fair. your short one-line posts remind me of Skyrim's protagonist. debating with people like you is always a guesswork and never pleasant.
Are you fricking kidding me? You're literally imaging I'm saying something you disagree with even though I barely said anything
you WANT to be angry at someone
>I don't know why people have such a hard time swallowing this pill when rivers and lakes used to catch fire for days before basic economic regulation.
Pure capitalism without additional regulation that limits its defining principle does. Because humans are the ones using it. If you can't see that, you're the one not taking human nature into account.
>Because humans are the ones using it. If you can't see that, you're the one not taking human nature into account.
I've heard/read people saying that you should design societies around the better qualities of humanity rather than run it based on the idea that humans are shitty and short-sighted and all that.
HOWEVER, I find it hard to trust those people aren't just out to make other people be more trusting, so they can take advantage. It seems unlikely that anyone with grand designs for society is coming from a position of NOT wanting to seize power.
City state nationalism
nationalist socialism
post scarcity simulation worlds
>small business owners arent the target of most leftist political groups by the way, they actually sympathize with them
WHICH IS WHY, THEY FRICKING BURNED THEM DOWN WITH EVEN A FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED EUROPEAN COMMUNIST TERRORIST GROUP.
Because they just care SOOOOOO much about the plight of the common man, which is why they're all completely vicious to anyone owning any sort of business, or the workers there (if they aren't one).
Not him but a system can be the best and still have flaws that necessitate checks on it. Market failures are a good example when it comes to capitalism, but acknowledging the existence of market failures in specific sectors isn't the same thing as abolishing private ownership in a tyrannical societal collapse. You fricking moron.
not even fricking libtards are asking for abolishing private property you idiot
what people fricking want is for corporations and upper class people to get a fricking leash put on their necks so they have to respond for their crimes and actually pay taxes instead of getting bailed out by the government everytime
everyone is so fricking tired of seeing rich people getting away with fricking up EVERYTHING and not suffering any of the consequences
Black person did you miss when lockdowns happened and it was wielded as a cudgel to destroy every small business around?
Yes, they support private property (and by extension businesses) being abolished for "the greater good".
I'm so fricking sick of this shit.
Some people become attached to a concept/ideal/political worldview to the point that an insult to it becomes an insult to them, even if they won't admit it.
Capitalism does not necessitate endless growth brainlet. You're conflating human greed with an economic model.
You guys realize that changing the economic system we live in won't actually change how game development works right? Making games, especially big games is always going to be hard and while corporate bullshit can certainly make things worse it's not some spooky boogie man you can kill and magically turn the industry into a utopia.
Most people who participate in armchair politics and economics don't realize that not only would a change in the system not occur overnight, it would be extremely turbulent and disrupt the lives of everybody in the nation immensely. Which is why the throwing the baby out with the bathwater solution a lot of anti-capitalists have is complete idiocy.
Well, Ganker is one bubble out of many, and we have people here who don't realize they are in one and they keep insisting that their worldview is what the majority of people hold (or should hold). Which makes it rather funny when discussing boogeymen.
Hubris. Games used to be developed by people who loved gaming and games. Imagination and drive were big proponents in great game designers and it was easy to get a place in the industry.
Today the games industry is a big boys (girls and troons) club where entry is difficult and relies primarily on who you know. Games are made not for gamers and what they can imagine, but instead for two reasons. Reason 1, Money. Reason 2, a vehicle for political change. Hiring is done with these two reasons in mind. Which is why main hires are people in sales, art school graduates and games journalists.
What's funny is the people making games today are completely honest about their motivations and you idiots still keep swallowing their turds.
Basically anyone trying to sell you a system on the idea that it'll be better for everyone is a liar - at the very best it'll benefit them and them alone. No matter the system, nobody gives a shit about you.
Oh, I get it. The user asked for "Swing with rope in the middle."
instead he got a swing and a miss! harr!
plot twist the user asked for a rocking chair.
>What the user actually desired
Because you have a different mindset as a developer than the average consumer.
this is why only one person should be directing things.
Capitalism forces people to compete in a totalitarian extend and hyper-focus on a single specialty with the threat of losing career and ability to live. Only the most unimaginative autistic morons and soulless yes-men make it in current year creative industries. Executive decisions are made to guarantee maximum profits, which are determined by obsessively copying previous successful games to a fault, which leads to memetic inbreeding and regression.
just for this gay little comment, im raising your rent b***hboy
I've seen supposed "conservatives" b***hing about "post-modernism" being some kind of socialist goal, but it's actually a critical analysis of the world we live in. The true post-modern condition is the yuppie psycho corporate climber who wants success only for its own sake.
Hitler betrayed pretty much every socialist promise he gave during his climb to power. He wasn't really a socialist. Nazis don't have any real convictions or morals, they only lie when it is convenient.
>Hitler betrayed pretty much every socialist promise he gave during his climb to power. He wasn't really a socialist. Nazis don't have any real convictions or morals, they only lie when it is convenient.
He wears his heart on his sleeve in Mein Kampf. He elaborates that the state should implement whatever policy best fits the race at that point in time, and that the state has a duty to constantly adjust as situation demands rather than adopting an economic ideology (aka. religion),
The whole point of national-socialism was that it was just the nationalist answer to the contemporary discontent among the workers that communism was taking advantage of.
Wait so, his whole ideology is "don't let ideology get in the way of what needs to be done"?
it's just power. no ethics, no ideology. do whatever it takes to seize power. say whatever people want to hear to seize power and once you've seized power do everything you can to defend it because power is fleeting.
They probably don't play them.
Why are you not a socialist Ganker?
Modern development suffers from a serious case of "doesn't play games". When you say this out loud, it causes all sorts of people to show up and say
>That's not true, I played a ton of Tetris, you are small time compared to my Tetris playtime!
before they start shouting about the definition of actually playing games and calling people nerds for actually playing games.
Meanwhile, almost every serious flaw in every modern game brings the same thing to mind: did anyone actually play this? Why is performing basic actions so inconvenient? Why does it run so poorly? Why is this character/class so much more effective at literally everything, and why is this character/class a dead pick? Why is the loot/progression system in this game totally uninteresting? Why are these systems all completely disconnected from each other? Why is there a DLC that adds something that already exists in the game? Why are the tooltips notoriously inaccurate to this very day? Why are critical pieces of text mistranslated to the point of unusability, and why are they not fixed yet?
People who make games do play games, the problem is games are hard to make and they're on tight schedules
Adding to this to say even if you play a lot of games that doesn't mean you'd be qualified to make them. I've played games basically daily for the past two decades of my life but I'd probably be SHIT at making a game.
YAAAAAAASSSS I LOVE CORPORATIONS
>Who cares about corruption or fricking up the economy and environment?!? They are making our children gay by using rainbows!!
The same people that fricked up the economy and polluted the environment? Yeah, they're the ones profiteering from the "green" economy.
Fricking moron.
You are one dense mother fricker if you don't get the point of that image.
to be fair i hated occupy hippies more than i hated some globohomosexual corporation
Because vidya developers is no longer a labor of love, it's strictly for profit and there are thousands of do nothing jobs/careers that have been built up around the development of vidya.
Ie. PR, HR, quality assurance, middle management, code checkers, consultants, etc.
It's what is referred to as a 'racket'.