this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
201 points (95.1% liked)

Gaming

20052 readers
35 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 18 points 7 months ago (3 children)

It's PR. Anti-capitalist sentiments score well in focus groups.

[–] lustyargonian@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Wouldn't these sentiments lead to expectations and then actual changes in policies?

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago

As long as the policy changes lead to even more profits, then sure.

[–] p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 months ago

lol the difference of course being that Phil Spencer is not living on the income of a standup comedian.

[–] thesporkeffect@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

If nothing else, it keeps an anticapitalist narrative in the public discourse

[–] kadu@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

A controlled anticapitalist discourse. This is no different than that Pepsi ad with the "protesters" sharing a Pepsi with the police.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 7 months ago

Time will tell. I mean, he's not wrong. I think it's pretty clear that studios have to make profitable games at the cost of interesting games. But it's not like msft or anyone else is going to change their behavior. They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to profit as much as possible.