This isnt anywhere near the level of mainstream game that most of these boycotts are focused on. It’s definitely a more niche audience.

The biggest thing is if streamers get in on the boycott. That’ll affect sales the most.

But they said they wouldn’t!

It was very much not an action oriented game. It was more about building resources and exploration. I can definitely see it not appealing to large swatches of the gaming population. Especially those used to the modern spate of action rpgs.

They’re literally selling faster than the original Switch, what the fuck are you smoking?

Wii fit trainer?

Yeah, totally not engineered by people who profit off people getting dumber…

Lots of things cause harm while also doing good things. It’s a balance.

The problem is when that balance skews more one way than another.

When all the nefarious people encouraging this abuse die off.

You’ll notice that they don’t exist in the future world of Idiocracy. That’s because it’s a fictional world, with a very basic premise only vaguely related to reality.

The problem isn’t that people are dumb, it’s that the people in power want to keep people dumb. Without that, it’s not like we’ll continue to devolve into helpless infantile people with no ability to think for ourselves.

That make sense for why the confusion is there. But… “bad actors” or not, the well is poisoned. You don’t keep drinking from a poisoned well just because you think it shouldn’t be. Especially when there are other wells that are readily available. If anything, being able to distinguish between the two is more helpful than trying to keep waters that are already irrevocably muddied just because archaically they were not.

It always seems odd to me that “politics” is often conflated with “nationalism” or just plain government. That’s not really what politics is, politics is power plays and public relations. It’s more marketing than it is governance.

Inclusion can be a part of politics, in the same way it’s part of companies advertising during pride month… but it’s not the foundation of it.

Sometimes people have ideas that just don’t work out. Even if the same people make another game, unless they just make a carbon copy they’re going to try and do something different. Sometimes it doesn’t work as well as the original, but at least it’s not churning out the same thing over and over and hoping people don’t notice.

Granted, Gamefreak has basically been doing that for 25 years, so what do I know?

I just don’t understand their desire to be the center of attention

There is that aspect of it, but there’s also the aspect of writing your own destiny, about creating something you care about instead of just being a nameless cog in an industrial machine putting out consumerist crap day in and day out. Why is the latter more admirable to you than the former?

Who did you?

Also, you didn’t choose to share your profession with us. It makes me think that you’re attempting to create a social media presence of your own.

Either that or I don’t think value is only subjective to what you do for a living. That my opinion is somehow less valuable because I don’t fall into a specific field you perceive as valuable.

I’m just saying that without those who work in physical reality, creating tangibles with tangible things, make the mental edifices possible.

And often those non-tangible things help to give those who make the tangible things the willpower to go on. It’s not a one way street, where value is only created by those who create tangible goods and stolen by the intangible. That’s a very pessimistic, if not “holier-than-thou” perspective. As though anyone who doesn’t do what you respect isn’t worth as much as someone who does.

Like I said, a very boomer attitude.

Why won’t you feel sympathy for someone who’s hurting? Why do you feel that someone needs to fall into a very narrow category to be “worth your time”?

Just because someone doesn’t fall into your narrow view of what’s worthwhile doesn’t mean they’re not worth basic human compassion.

Socialism is about more than unions, that’s just the most obvious aspect in a heavily capitalist society. It’s about the sharing of burdens, which includes more than physical labor.

Just keeping up with the boomer takes…

Something doesn’t need to be a physical product to hold tangible value.

Just because you do something a certain way doesn’t mean everyone does. A huge chunk of these peoples income comes from the random people who find their videos or streams because of the “algorithm”. Not from their regular viewers. Those regular viewers allow for a certain amount of steadiness, but they’re also more likely to watch videos at a later time rather than right when they’re uploaded. Which is a significant drop in revenue for each view.

Doesn’t help if you’re a streamer, though. I guess that was a part I left out, whoops -_-

The question isn’t about admiration, it’s about considering them worthy of being respected as fellow human beings who are also struggling. You’re just shitting on them because the way they make their living is more directly linkable to sources you don’t like.

Every job is going to be that way, one way or another. Even many charities will have shady ties somewhere, that most of the volunteers and employees don’t know shit about. Shitting on these people because you don’t respect the things they’re linked to, and ultimately have no control over, is petty and meaningless. It devalues them as humans, and as much as I’m sure you don’t think so, they’re still human. And deserve to be treated as such.

If they’re like the Pauls or something, I can see criticizing them for being shitty people… but that’s not what you’re doing, you’re shitting on them for being part of a system that exists whether they make use of it or not. And will continue to exist whether they use it or not.