Re:Epic Games Supports Blender Foundation with $1.2M
by seventhtiger on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @07:46AM
(#20449168)
It's not trickle-down theory. It's actual redistribution of wealth from publishers to developers. If a developer you like cuts a deal with Epic and ensures their own existence for one more game, then you should be very happy.
Studio closures are common, game services shut down, mass layoffs, and project cancellations. An exclusivity deal is much better than a publisher going in and changing monetization or game design to fit their strategy.
Re:Epic Games Supports Blender Foundation with $1.2M
by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @10:03AM
(#20450084)
> If a developer you like cuts a deal with Epic and ensures their own existence for one more game, then you should be very happy.
Where do you get off telling me how I should feel? The way I feel is that exclusivity that has nothing to do with technical constraints and everything to do with corporate sumo wrestling is not and never will be good for gaming as a whole.
Re:Epic Games Supports Blender Foundation with $1.2M
by seventhtiger on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @10:13AM
(#20450177)
Not you personally. Rhetorical you, the gamer.
Exclusivity can be good if it results in more games being developed, at a better quality, cheaper. Do you disagree with that?
Steam links, Steam controllers, Steam on Linux, Proton, and the OpenVR SDK to name a few. Sure several of those things were failures, but it isn't like they aren't trying.
> In the video game industry developers are the ones that bring the most value to customers.
That's some trickle-down theory right there. I'm not convinced that what's good for developers is necessarily good for gamers or the gaming market. Case in point: loot boxes.