3 ms·
Games are art. Some people do it for money, some do it to express themselves, some do it for fun. What's worthless to you is very valuable to someone else.
by bogwog 1y ago
Games are art. Some people do it for money, some do it to express themselves, some do it for fun. What's worthless to you is very valuable to someone else.
- webdevver 1y agothis is 1:1 what i hear people say about solana memecoins
- shigawire 1y agoMemecoins as art? I count myself fortunate to have not been subjected to that line of thought until now.
- Imustaskforhelp 1y agoYes, Also petition to just call memecoins ponzi scheme or scamcoins to not even ever let people think that its worth putting 1 cent of money on. Scamcoins are comparable to disease or even cancer. Theoretically every scam is.
- DrillShopper 1y agoOh no, they're fully irony poisoned. Welp
- kg 1y agoUnlike memecoins most games have utility via interactivity. I say most because there are definitely games like Banana that don't really have any interactivity, but it arguably had a different kind of utility: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aitVHsg0rWA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aitVHsg0rWA
- phendrenad2 1y agoYes but it's undeniable that the industry has changed recently. It used to be, someone would make a game to express themselves, it would be picked up by a major studio, it would be expanded and polished until it had mass appeal, and became the next "blockbuster" game. Now, it's, someone makes a game to express themselves, and they eke by on a trickly of income, they fight for placement among the sea of shovelware on the game store sites, and they never get picked up by a big publisher. Meanwhile, the big 3 game companies are creating the same formulaic game over and over and, through massive advertising campaigns, have captured all of the customers.
- sarchertech 1y ago>expanded and polished until it had mass appeal, and became the next “blockbuster”. I’m not going to say that never happened. But I can’t think of any examples off the top of my head. The fortunes of small independent teams have certainly risen and fallen multiple times over the years.
- phendrenad2 1y agoBlizzard fits this model. They didn't go from Warcraft to WC3 to WoW without outside investment.
- sarchertech 1y agoBlizzard certainly doesn’t fit the model of >someone would make a game to express themselves, it would be picked up by a major studio, it would be expanded and polished until it had mass appeal, and became the next "blockbuster" game. Warcraft was a big success and Warcraft 2 was a huge success. Both of those games were published by Blizzard themselves. They were purchased by Vivendi a few years later. I can’t think of a single game where a major studio picked up a small game then expanded and polished it into a blockbuster. The closest I can think of is maybe DOTA. Where the creator of a mod was hired by valve to make a stand alone game. But that definitely wasn’t normal.
- phendrenad2 1y agoThat's just wrong though. "Warcraft" was a "success" but it didn't reach a wide audience. They took on investment money and were able to get each subsequent game to a wider audience. Know anyone investing in indie games in 2025?
- krapp 1y agoI can only think of examples where famous streamers made indie games go viral.