• @rdri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    585 months ago

    There should be means that would allow fans and appreciators donate money to creators. And it looks like we already have a lot of those.

    Also, culture and art should be promoted by governments. Therefore taxes could go that way too.

    Anyway, it’s not like people say it’s fine for everyone to not pay. But at least we know it’s fine for many to pay much less than the rest, see regional pricing and discounts. Creators are totally fine with those. Nothing prevents it from being extended further to people who have a hard time trying to become potential customers.

    • @Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      I think a good compromise is to allow for sale for a period of years, and then when it’s no longer making as much profits, for a creator to give permission for it to be ok to be pirated, which basically means that they’ve sorta kinda maybe ceded legal consequences to pirating their work.

    • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      What of there were a model for video games where the games themselves were free to download and play, but things like cosmetics, weapons, stat boosts, and character unlocks were sold piecemeal to those willing to pay?

      That model certainly wouldn’t become a cancer on the entire industry and ruin online gaming, making us beg for the days when you could just buy a fucking game and play it.

      • @rdri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        In a reality where there are no paid games (I assume Witcher-tier single player games would be free), those wouldn’t necessarily become a cancer. It all depends on what games you must compete with. Also there are many ways how you can implement cosmetics and other DLC. FOMO enforcement is not something that should automatically come with any game. Deep Rock Galactic handles paid dlc, free seasons and cosmetics brilliantly in my opinion, and I don’t see why other games can’t have success if they did it the same way. Maybe it’s a combination of original financial decisions, game quality, players reactions and overall current situation/background.

        Also I can’t get rid of the thought that there is an underestimated connection between spending money on a game and desire to spend time on playing it. It seems that if developers of good games would be suitably rewarded according to players satisfaction, there will be no need to pursue financial success by pushing cancer on players.