The author says it's not about the money, but money was only one half of the verbal contract, the half that was actually delivered, and the author spends the entire article talking about the money half.

For me, the real issue for an artist that is actually not talking about the money would be the part of the verbal contract that was not fulfilled: Some type of promotional support for the author's other works. Exposure of that work the hundreds of millions of people seems like it would have a staggeringly massive non-monetary value (and in fact could have led to significant monetary gain). Instead though, the author goes to great pains to say it wasn't about the money while mostly talking about the money.

> No, and I feel like he made it extremely clear that this story is not really about money and his feelings are not driven by a lack of royalties.

If it wasn't about money, than what was it about? "Fairness"? So money?

Yeah fairness, emotions, recognition, his own flaws and failures, and his general outlook on life. It's not about contract law or conflict with Mojang or Microsoft, it's just a story about his feelings.

Feelings are useful for figuring out what your goals are.

They can be money, they can be something more vague like recognition, or truly nebulous like "a sense of human connection," but you've got to have goals. Otherwise you're just a child stumbling in the dark and yelling out.

Reading the post, I don't know what the author's goals are, and I get the impression they don't either.

It sounds like they weren't sure about their goals to begin with, didn't do anything to achieve them, felt robbed because other people's goals were misaligned with theirs, before finally accepting they can't change the past, which

Duh.

> it's just a story about his feelings.

Oh I'm sure. But feelings and money aren't mutually exclusive. Why do you think he posts donation links under the heading "THIS IS WHERE YOU GET TO SAVE MY LIFE"?