Many are tired of being milked at every possible angle.
That’s the problem. The milking.
they need to make money, i don’t feel it wrong to try to milk every possible angle
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
Kyunw@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
but its their job, they will stop doing it if everyone stop playing the game
u can’t blame them for doing their job, when people still playing the game
SystemDisc@feddit.org 14 hours ago
“Just doing my job”
-Some random Nazi soldier
Kyunw@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
why people keep making stupid comparison? why? just an effort to make my stand is morally wrong?
those people that got kill by the nazi have no choice, they cant simply refuse to get kill or got drag to the camp
do the game developer forces you to play their game? its your choice whether to play it or not
Apeman42@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
Is it hard to type, or to see the screen, with all those corporate dicks in your mouth?
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 14 hours ago
People like you are the reason everything is getting worse all the time. Keep your worthless opinions to yourself.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
Why? Because I accept that businesses exist to make money, not out of the goodness of their hearts?
If you think a system or game is predatory, the solution is simple: stop supporting it. If enough people actually vote with their wallets, companies are forced to change because it hurts their bottom line. Throwing tantrums online doesn’t change basic economic incentives, consumer behavior does
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 13 hours ago
Why? Because I accept that businesses exist to make money, not out of the goodness of their hearts?
Yes, there’s no reason you need to carry water for them. These dipshits shouldn’t be able to find a single comment online supporting their behavior. They should feel shitty and worthless about what they’re doing every second of their miserable existence. Companies can make plenty of money without enshittifying every single aspect of our lives.
If you think a system or game is predatory, the solution is simple: stop supporting it. If enough people actually vote with their wallets, companies are forced to change because it hurts their bottom line. Throwing tantrums online doesn’t change basic economic incentives, consumer behavior does
Sure, and I have a lower threshold for it than most but these companies will keep tightening the screws forever because there will always be new people coming in where the current level of bullshit is normal and they can push those people even further. My resistance to it alone accomplishes nothing.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
You make a really fair point about how shifting baselines can normalize bad practices over time.
My main reason for leaning so heavily against that original post was that they were telling people to off themselves just for wanting to make money. Corporate monetization might be annoying, but suggesting suicide over it is way out of line.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Oh, I just realized you’re the original commenter XD
Why didn’t you lead with a reasonable argument in the first place, rather than suggesting self-harm or dismissing other points of view? I actually agree with you on the domino effect, even though it doesn’t really change my core view that businesses naturally try to milk it
Sordid_Seraphim@lemmy.zip 13 hours ago
“If you hate the US you should move”-ass take.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
i think its more like “if you hate the hotel service you should move”
j_elgato@leminal.space 13 hours ago
Your mother’s corpse had teeth, right?
Some teeth have fillings… some fillings are made of valuable metals.
The Disney corporation should exhume the corpse of your loved ones and sell their teeth on eBay - they need to make money… right?
It’s the only way to be sure every POSSIBLE angle has been milked.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
You’re comparing a non-consensual crime to a voluntary consumer product. Unlawfully exhuming a grave leaves the victim and family with zero say in the matter.
A video game gives you complete choice, if a developer milks a game with ads, you can choose to uninstall it and give them zero dollars. Try making an analogy that actually deals with voluntary choice, because grave robbery isn’t it.
Why not use a realistic analogy? Like how some car companies tried charging monthly subscriptions to activate built-in features like heated seats or remote start. BMW eventually killed that feature specifically because subscription sales were so extremely low. That’s a real example of consumer choice driving corporate decisions, not grave robbery.
j_elgato@leminal.space 12 hours ago
Laws (and crimes) and consumer behaviors are governed by popular concensus of what we, the body politic, are willing to tolerate - neither are absolutes, and both are subject to change.
A realistic analogy would make my point less clearly than an exaggerated cartoon.
If the consumer market, or the corporations that govern it, decide that grave robbery is to be to tolerated as a for-profit adventure…
well, we’ve very few tools with with to oppose them.
(See also: the collapse of the biosphere)
Fortunately, in America at least, It’s likely your loved ones lacked the medical insurance necessary to cover the cost of dental fillings.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Laws (and crimes) and consumer behaviors are governed by popular concensus of what we, the body politic, are willing to tolerate - neither are absolutes, and both are subject to change.>
You’re right that social norms shift, but fundamental legal protections don’t evaporate overnight, especially in democratic nations with institutional checks. Suggesting that society will casually normalize grave robbery for profit within our lifetimes isn’t realistic.
A realistic analogy would make my point less clearly than an exaggerated cartoon.>
Admitting that your argument relies on an “exaggerated cartoon” proves that your logic breaks down under realistic conditions. Video game ads are a voluntary consumer choice, but grave robbery is a non-consensual crime.
If you want a realistic corporate greed analogy, look at a company intentionally polluting the air and then selling clean air filters to profit off the damage. At least that deals with actual market behavior instead of shock-value crime scenarios.
capt_wolf@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
I think they were trying to make an argument regarding ethics and morality and didn’t do the best job by throwing in a strawman argument. That being said, television networks literally do it every day. That they’re doing it is arguably unethical, but if you’re expecting ethics and morality from a megacorp, you’re a fool.
Everything else you said stands. Don’t use the product. Don’t give the company your money. Nobody’s forcing you to consume the media. If you do, don’t complain, you’re the fool who bought a game with ads.
isyasad@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
I might agree that it’s not morally wrong for them to add advertisements to milk more money out of people, but it’s definitely artistically wrong in that they are hugely compromising the thing they are making just for extra money.
And one might further argue that it’s morally wrong in that adding the advertisements is going to make the world a more frustrating, enshittified, dumbed-down place, just by a little bit.
Maybe a more apt comparison than “what if a Nazi killed you” or “what if somebody stole your mother’s teeth” would be what if you owned a food company and filled your food with sticks and rocks to save money. People would not be obligated to buy it, but it’s definitely wrong and doesn’t do anybody any good.
Kyunw@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
Didn’t you just prove my point? If nobody buys food because I put rocks and sticks in it, I go out of business. That’s exactly how consumer choice forces bad ideas to fail