What do you mean? You were the one who brought morality into this by comparing game developers to Nazi soldiers.

You claim that ‘just doing their job’ isn’t a valid defense, but how else am I supposed to look at it? It is literally their job to find new ways to monetize a product. If a company pushes a bad strategy, consumers can just stop playing and paying, like when BMW tried subscription heated seats and failed because of low sales. Blaming employees for doing what they are hired to do, while people keep playing the game, makes no sense. Trying new ways to make money isn’t a moral crime; it’s just business.

same developer as slither.io?

can imagine if that what elon planning XD

but it still gonna deter the usage, because in order to make it profitable they have to put more ads without making too obnoxious

tbh, i would love to watch ads about indomie when i play game, at least i will have reason to eat it and it remind me of the good ol day of internet cafe

but isnt this kind deal is from like shitty mobile game? i remember when i play really shitty idle game, it have this deal XD

But what actually makes it bad? Is making a game and wanting to get a financial benefit out of it inherently wrong?

Why doesn’t that same logic apply to celebrities doing brand endorsements, shoving products down our throats that they probably don’t even use just because they are famous? And don’t forget product placement in movies.

Also, developing a modern video game can cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and if it flops, it’s just a dead loss. Unlike movies, which can recoup losses through streaming deals or cable rights, a bad video game usually means nobody plays it and the studio loses everything. That is a massive financial risk.

Where do you draw the line?

isnt that good? so ea cant use it XD

i suggesting the same stuff as you, but i got bomb with downvote XD

hahaha

patenting stuff and using it, is two different thing

People like you are the reason everything is getting worse all the time. Keep your worthless opinions to yourself.

Maybe you should apply your advice to yourself on this one.

Laws (and crimes) and consumer behaviors are governed by popular concensus of what we, the body politic, are willing to tolerate - neither are absolutes, and both are subject to change.

You’re right that social norms shift, but fundamental legal protections don’t evaporate overnight, especially in democratic nations with institutional checks. Suggesting that society will casually normalize grave robbery for profit within our lifetimes isn’t realistic.

A realistic analogy would make my point less clearly than an exaggerated cartoon.

Admitting that your argument relies on an “exaggerated cartoon” proves that your logic breaks down under realistic conditions. Video game ads are a voluntary consumer choice, but grave robbery is a non-consensual crime.

If you want a realistic corporate greed analogy, look at a company intentionally polluting the air and then selling clean air filters to profit off the damage. At least that deals with actual market behavior instead of shock-value crime scenarios.

Oh, I just realized you’re the original commenter XD

Why didn’t you lead with a reasonable argument in the first place, rather than suggesting self-harm or dismissing other points of view? I actually agree with you on the domino effect, even though it doesn’t really change my core view that businesses naturally try to milk it

Didn’t you just prove my point? If nobody buys food because I put rocks and sticks in it, I go out of business. That’s exactly how consumer choice forces bad ideas to fail

Your point about normalization and the domino effect actually makes sense, and i agree with you on this

My main reason for leaning so heavily against that original post was that they were telling people to off themselves just for wanting to make money. Corporate monetization might be annoying, but suggesting suicide over it is way out of line.

You’re comparing a non-consensual crime to a voluntary consumer product. Unlawfully exhuming a corpse leaves the victim and family with zero say in the matter.

A video game gives you complete choice, if a developer milks a game with ads, you can choose to uninstall it and give them zero dollars. Try making an analogy that actually deals with voluntary choice, because grave robbery isn’t it.

Why not use a realistic analogy? Like how some car companies tried charging monthly subscriptions to activate built-in features like heated seats or remote start. BMW eventually killed that feature specifically because subscription sales were so extremely low. That’s a real example of consumer choice driving corporate decisions, not grave robbery.

why people keep making stupid comparison? why? just an effort to make my stand is morally wrong?

those people that got kill by the nazi have no choice, they cant simply refuse to get kill or got drag to the camp

do the game developer forces you to play their game? its your choice whether to play it or not

i think its more like “if you hate the hotel service you should move”

Why? Because I accept that businesses exist to make money, not out of the goodness of their hearts?

If you think a system or game is predatory, the solution is simple: stop supporting it. If enough people actually vote with their wallets, companies are forced to change because it hurts their bottom line. Throwing tantrums online doesn’t change basic economic incentives, consumer behavior does