Then, responding to those who have said he’s “only doing this for the money", Szymanski tweeted: “Yes, no fucking shit. I make games for a living. If I didn’t want to earn money from them I wouldn’t charge money for them.”
The game follows the premise of being trapped in an underwater submarine out of necessity to capture deep pictures.
Lmao…
AAA dogshit shovelware game increases price from $60 to $70 and some people are unhappy.
Small time indie dev bumps game price from $6 to $8 to keep up with inflation and people lose their shit to the point it goes on gaming msm
No wonder we’re the most abused market.
Buying the game now
Fuck you all, im going to go buy it out of spite
"I like the business model of ‘I want money so I make something that I think is worth money, and you pay me that money and you get the thing, and we’re all happy’,” Szymanski continued. “That’s it. There’s nothing complicated or hidden here.
Lmao I love it, gonna get this game now
Tale as old as time. I’ll just leave this here: https://genius.com/Tool-hooker-with-a-penis-lyrics
People will literally complain about everything, no sense in trying to appease everyone all the time.
It’s a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6. I get wanting more money, but your product isn’t worth the price increase to begin with.
It’s a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6.
Facts and opinions are different things.
If you don’t like the game, or think it’s overpriced, don’t buy it. The dev should continue to price it as they see fit.
When AAA publishers price games at $70, the solution is not to buy it. It’s not different here, except that $6 > $8 is not a difference most people (except the dev, due to volume) will care about.
Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.
Seriously, what’s up with you people? Do you need every single statement prefaced with “this is only my subjective opinion and not concrete fact but-!” Or you’ll take it like they’re trying to preach the word of god?
You’re not a computer. Why are you acting like one?
Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.
They did. Just because you don’t explicitly say “this is a fact”, doesn’t mean you’re not making a statement of fact. “This is a $5 game” is a statement of fact. “I wouldn’t pay more than $5 for this game” is a statement of opinion. That’s the difference between humans reading a passage and computers doing the same. Humans take context and past experience into account, all of which say that the phrasing they originally used implies an objective fact.
No he didn’t. He said “this isn’t a $6 game, let alone an $8 game”. Both of those are subjective opinion statements. He is referring to the perceived value of the game being lower to the actual costs of the game ($6 and $8 respectively)
This is really not a difficult thing. I’m not sure why so many Lemmy users are struggling with it
In the only perfectly logical interpretation of the comment, you would be correct. Unfortunately, humans are not always perfectly logical and will often say things that are illogical. The most common meaning intended by the phrase “this is a $5 game” is the illogical one of presenting it as an objective fact.
I refuse to believe that this is the first time you’ve encountered an illogical statement.
So under your grand interpretation, you should default to just saying “no, when they said that they actually meant it in the wrong way”.
You might just be too cynical and online to read man
It’s fine (and expected in most human interactions) to default to assuming that the most commonly intended meaning is what’s intended. And no, that doesn’t mean you should respond like an asshole. Respond to the intended meaning of the original statement instead of commenting on how your use of the English language is superior to theirs.
This is how human interactions work in general. It’s worth learning if you want to fit into society.
Seriously, what’s up with you people?
This tends to mean you’ve misunderstood a basic social norm.
Like interpreting obvious opinion statements as objective fact?
Which part of your statement made it obvious?
Well, one, Jesus Christ, it’s not even my statement. Two, the guy saying “this game isn’t worth $8” is obviously a subjective statement because it literally cannot ever be an objective statement.
Like. By definition.
When you see a movie rating and someone rates it four out of five stars, you understand that’s not them declaring a universal constant, correct?
Here’s perhaps what has eluded you overall: $2 isn’t even worth continuing this argument.
