Then, responding to those who have said he’s “only doing this for the money", Szymanski tweeted: “Yes, no fucking shit. I make games for a living. If I didn’t want to earn money from them I wouldn’t charge money for them.”

The game follows the premise of being trapped in an underwater submarine out of necessity to capture deep pictures.

  • superfes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    People will literally complain about everything, no sense in trying to appease everyone all the time.

  • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Lmao…

    AAA dogshit shovelware game increases price from $60 to $70 and some people are unhappy.

    Small time indie dev bumps game price from $6 to $8 to keep up with inflation and people lose their shit to the point it goes on gaming msm

    No wonder we’re the most abused market.

  • adam_y@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    No mate, I’m doing you a favour playing your game. You should pay me. It would be great exposure. I’ve got literally some followers.

    And yeah, I’ll bang on about minimum wage being too low and I’ll post about AAA Devs ripping off their workers, but a lone developer asking $10 for something that probably took them months, too much. Too much.

    What a sell out.

    (/S just in case)

  • kryllic@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    "I like the business model of ‘I want money so I make something that I think is worth money, and you pay me that money and you get the thing, and we’re all happy’,” Szymanski continued. “That’s it. There’s nothing complicated or hidden here.

    Lmao I love it, gonna get this game now

  • MagnyusG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6. I get wanting more money, but your product isn’t worth the price increase to begin with.

    • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a 5 dollar game (being generous) that was already overpriced at $6.

      Facts and opinions are different things.

      If you don’t like the game, or think it’s overpriced, don’t buy it. The dev should continue to price it as they see fit.

      When AAA publishers price games at $70, the solution is not to buy it. It’s not different here, except that $6 > $8 is not a difference most people (except the dev, due to volume) will care about.

      • Minotaur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.

        Seriously, what’s up with you people? Do you need every single statement prefaced with “this is only my subjective opinion and not concrete fact but-!” Or you’ll take it like they’re trying to preach the word of god?

        You’re not a computer. Why are you acting like one?

              • Minotaur@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                Well, one, Jesus Christ, it’s not even my statement. Two, the guy saying “this game isn’t worth $8” is obviously a subjective statement because it literally cannot ever be an objective statement.

                Like. By definition.

                When you see a movie rating and someone rates it four out of five stars, you understand that’s not them declaring a universal constant, correct?

        • howrar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Well. Thankfully he never said that his statement was an objective fact.

          They did. Just because you don’t explicitly say “this is a fact”, doesn’t mean you’re not making a statement of fact. “This is a $5 game” is a statement of fact. “I wouldn’t pay more than $5 for this game” is a statement of opinion. That’s the difference between humans reading a passage and computers doing the same. Humans take context and past experience into account, all of which say that the phrasing they originally used implies an objective fact.

          • Minotaur@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            No he didn’t. He said “this isn’t a $6 game, let alone an $8 game”. Both of those are subjective opinion statements. He is referring to the perceived value of the game being lower to the actual costs of the game ($6 and $8 respectively)

            This is really not a difficult thing. I’m not sure why so many Lemmy users are struggling with it

            • howrar@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              In the only perfectly logical interpretation of the comment, you would be correct. Unfortunately, humans are not always perfectly logical and will often say things that are illogical. The most common meaning intended by the phrase “this is a $5 game” is the illogical one of presenting it as an objective fact.

              I refuse to believe that this is the first time you’ve encountered an illogical statement.

              • Minotaur@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                So under your grand interpretation, you should default to just saying “no, when they said that they actually meant it in the wrong way”.

                You might just be too cynical and online to read man

                • howrar@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  It’s fine (and expected in most human interactions) to default to assuming that the most commonly intended meaning is what’s intended. And no, that doesn’t mean you should respond like an asshole. Respond to the intended meaning of the original statement instead of commenting on how your use of the English language is superior to theirs.

                  This is how human interactions work in general. It’s worth learning if you want to fit into society.