3 ms·
The argument would be like, "if I don't care, if original ideas are being developed for games (and, if I don't care, if it's viable to do so), I don't care for
by masswerk 13y ago
The argument would be like, "if I don't care, if original ideas are being developed for games (and, if I don't care, if it's viable to do so), I don't care for the games, I enjoy."
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mikeash 13y agoSorry, but I'm afraid I can't understand your comment at all. Could you rephrase?
- masswerk 13y agoI would propose that a substantial argument was made in this post: You're mentioning that most of the games in the stores would be BS, lacking creativity, just hunting for in-app-purchases, etc. Now, if you're enjoying a creative idea, it wouldn't be totally out of scope to care, if it would be viable for anyone to come up with it. "[B]ut couldn't be bothered" didn't sound like this to me at all. Free software is a nice thing, but it just doesn't pay, unless it's just a hobby. If you would want someone to invest in original ideas, I'm afraid, it's not the best long term strategy to go for free clones.
- mikeash 13y agoThrees doesn't look all that interesting to me. I didn't care to try it out when I first heard of it, and 2048 didn't change that opinion. I'm not going to go out and buy a different game just to support the concept when I'm enjoying something else that by all accounts is not really the same game.