no, it’s not. unless there are people protesting outside so-called AAA company offices to only make games with more crunch, bigger empty maps with pointless busywork, more detailed “realistic” looting animations that take so long it becomes a chore playing the game, it’s their choice and waste to do so. no one asks games to cost millions to make, and no one demands them to make billions to count as successful. they pretend this is a demand. it’s not.
No one is arguing with you about the bad practices here friend, it is simply a bad comparison. They’re two different conversations. Just because something is related doesn’t change that
No the takaway is that its a bad comparison.
it’s not. one being infinitely more wasteful for a lesser product that costs more doesn’t make it a bad comparison.
It’s a bad comparison, and also what youre saying about it is correct on that it’s wasteful etc. that’s simply a different conversation
no, it’s not. unless there are people protesting outside so-called AAA company offices to only make games with more crunch, bigger empty maps with pointless busywork, more detailed “realistic” looting animations that take so long it becomes a chore playing the game, it’s their choice and waste to do so. no one asks games to cost millions to make, and no one demands them to make billions to count as successful. they pretend this is a demand. it’s not.
No one is arguing with you about the bad practices here friend, it is simply a bad comparison. They’re two different conversations. Just because something is related doesn’t change that
it’s not though. the point is games don’t need to be that costly or pricey to be good.
The point I agree with, the comparison is still bad.