I mean, now that the video streaming industry has shown us how the endgame looks like for subscription models, you'd have to be crazy to want that for the videogame industry.

Whatever short-term gains you can get in convenience or price by buying into their penetration stage are not worth contributing to leading the hobby down that road even an iota.

[–] noobdoomguy8658@feddit.de 3 points 10 months ago

It's not even about what we want, but what the stakeholders and decision-makers push for in order to rack in more profits.

The gaming industry was at its highest in terms of fun and variability and innovation when the industry was still figuring out best ways to make mad money, no matter how ethical or morally bankrupt - now they know they can use fear of missing out and predatory tactics to lure people into essentially gambling in a free-to-play online game, or pad out a singleplayer one with mechanics that contribute nothing to the gameplay, but manage to fool game journalists (the ones that weren't already paid) into praising the game for its deep and branching loops, attracting more investor money or something.

A lot of people accuse us gamers of being a whiny crowd that cares too much and doesn't like to have fun, but I guess yeah, we do care a little too much and that's why so many of us try to actively influence the industry to go into a better direction when we vote with our wallets or write reviews or discuss games and practices in ways that can be hopefully seen by the industry's decision-makers.

Not to say there isn't just as many (if not more) gamers that don't care enough and still pour money into games and practices that are ultimately making the industry worse, only to make the stakeholders and CEOs wealthier.