3 ms·

> why should I be the one exposed to uncertainty when there are plenty of other complete and patched games out there vying for my attention? Because sometimes

> why should I be the one exposed to uncertainty when there are plenty of other complete and patched games out there vying for my attention? Because sometimes if you don't fund an idea that idea doesn't happen. Of course I'm not suggesting you jizz $4500 into a promise of a game like the guy in the article but throwing ten or twenty bucks behind an idea you wan't to see happen isn't always a bad idea. If it happens and it's bad? nevermind it was only 10 bucks, nice to see the idea attempted though. If it happens and it's good? awesome. If it implodes and I get nothing? meh, never mind it was 10 bucks.

the_snooze 8y ago
$10 won't make or break a game's development. It'll happen (or not) with or without my tiny advance payment. I'd rather hold on to that $10 and buy an actual game now instead of gambling on the promise of one in the future. As consumers, it's not our responsibility to support other people's open-ended projects. Let developers (and their actual publishers and investors) take on the risks themselves. It's better that way: with their skin in the game, they'll know when to say "no" to dumb features and actually get to a viable product.
- Retric 8y ago
  You can say the same thing about elections. However, because each choice is independent you end up collaborating with like minded people. Thus your 10$ ends up as 10,000$ from people like you. Game theory has a lot of interesting incite into these sorts of decisions.
  - michaelt 8y ago
    What does game theory say will happen if you give someone $200,000,000 with no obligation to do anything in exchange for it?
- deadbunny 8y ago
  > $10 won't make or break a game's development. No but thousands of $10s can. > As consumers, it's not our responsibility to support other people's open-ended projects. Why not? Patronage has been a key part of art for thousands of years. The current state of the game dev biz is that innovation and risk has taken a back seat to yearly releases churned out for mass appeal.
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  Your logic is the same logic used when people try give excuses for not voting. "My one vote won't matter". No single drop of water believes it is to be blamed for the flood.

the_snooze 8y ago

$10 won't make or break a game's development. It'll happen (or not) with or without my tiny advance payment. I'd rather hold on to that $10 and buy an actual game now instead of gambling on the promise of one in the future. As consumers, it's not our responsibility to support other people's open-ended projects. Let developers (and their actual publishers and investors) take on the risks themselves. It's better that way: with their skin in the game, they'll know when to say "no" to dumb features and actually get to a viable product.

Retric 8y ago
You can say the same thing about elections. However, because each choice is independent you end up collaborating with like minded people. Thus your 10$ ends up as 10,000$ from people like you. Game theory has a lot of interesting incite into these sorts of decisions.
- michaelt 8y ago
  What does game theory say will happen if you give someone $200,000,000 with no obligation to do anything in exchange for it?
deadbunny 8y ago
> $10 won't make or break a game's development. No but thousands of $10s can. > As consumers, it's not our responsibility to support other people's open-ended projects. Why not? Patronage has been a key part of art for thousands of years. The current state of the game dev biz is that innovation and risk has taken a back seat to yearly releases churned out for mass appeal.
Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
Your logic is the same logic used when people try give excuses for not voting. "My one vote won't matter". No single drop of water believes it is to be blamed for the flood.