Comment by mrguyorama
2 years ago
A reminder that this is very very relevant when people say bullshit like "Microtransactions are fine because games are so much more expensive now"
Nope, that hat they charge you $5 for cost them $200 in art time, and that's only because the artist was also setting up the pipeline to put arbitrary colors on the hat to sell those for another $5
I don't want to start an argument, but I don't get the animus about things like this. They're selling an expensive entertainment product in a sea of entertainment products. It's not like they're selling food, medicine, housing, or something like that, and even then, I encounter far fewer people rankled by the existence of, say, high-end restaurants they'd rather not pay for. Why not just vote with your feet?
I'm not sure how to properly interpret your comment? Are you saying microtransactions are still evil because they are profitable?
While I think $11k is a pitiful wage (but apparently somewhat normal in that city), it at least gives working artists a paycheck. Isn't that a good thing?
Rich westerners entertaining/decorating themselves on outsourced art from poorer countries... yes, it's vaguely colonial and kinda uncomfortable to think about, but is it really that different from buying woven goods or coffee or phones or whatever? At least in this case, the artists work in a relatively comfortable office and not in a field or sweatshop.
As a web dev in the US, I get paid much more than that, but at the end of the day I'm still just a minion for someone else's capitalist machine. Unfortunate, but still beats being a peasant...
Or did I misunderstand your point...?