• Grimy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s affecting you because of a loss of quality in the product you are receiving, a loss directly caused by greedy middle men you are here defending.

    The amount of companies being taxed by Gaben, Microsoft and Sony is vaste and not many of them would just take the 30% and run. There’s a lot of indie and medium sized companies that are barely making it.

    You can plug your ears all you want, it is affecting you and you are boot licking for pretending it isn’t. Gaben isn’t your friend even though he probably spends a lot of money trying to make you think he is.

    • bread@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 months ago

      Again, I’m not defending Gaben. If you think I’m a bootlicker, you can lick my ass. As stated, I don’t agree that it affects the quality of the product to the extent you’re suggesting, and going “well, it does” isn’t going to change my opinion.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        You were saying it didn’t affect you. Regardless of how much will go directly to shareholders, a good portion will be reinvested and lead to better games, which will affect your enjoyment.

        I never talked about extent, you are the one that took the hard approach by putting the level at 0. When I pointed it out that it can affect quality and not just price, you came back with “well it doesn’t”.

        I’m pretty sure in this context, saying a 30% increase of funds won’t lead to a jump of any kind in either the amount or the quality of products is being willfully blind.

        I guess it might be hard to admit that some of these billionaires are directly stealing from us.

        • bread@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          I maintain that it wouldn’t affect me. As for what would be reinvested, you say “a good portion,” I say an amount so low that its impact will be immeasurably low.

          You talked about extent in that you’re suggesting the improvement in quality would be worth caring about; this is just you being pedantic. Allow me to be pedantic as well: I never retorted “well, it doesn’t” because, unlike you, I’ve made it very clear that I’m giving my opinion rather than speaking in absolutes.

          I can admit that billionaires are getting more than their fair share, never having expressed otherwise here, which is also why I believe the money would largely be going from one well-padded pocket to another.

          We’ve both expressed our views so I won’t be continuing this conversation.