Do those one-off bigots that perhaps lended some labor to said games get royalties for the IP? If not, then this comparison is not even close to valid with a billionaire bigot raking in more wealth based on an IP they poisoned.
Comment on [Game] Hogwarts Legacy Adds FSR 3 and XeSS 2 With Mod Fixes in New Update
boletus@sh.itjust.works 2 days agoThe last AAA game you played is almost guaranteed to have been worked on by at least one racist, trans phobic, radical extremist of some kind. Just something to consider.
trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 day ago
boletus@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
Perhaps it wasn’t the best example, but the point I’m trying to get across is that almost any game you’ve played recently is likely profiting a bigot in some way or another.
Shareholders will always exist. Funding sources. Executives. Just because they didn’t write the code doesn’t mean they weren’t involved with the development. And they certainly make money off the success.
jac@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 hours ago
None of them bought the UK suprime court though.
boletus@sh.itjust.works 2 hours ago
Of course always vote with your wallet. Just saying it’s a complex topic and it’s one thing to boycott it because Rowling profits off it, but you’re also excluding the hundreds of hard working game developers who put years of their life towards a legitimately good game.
Unfortunately, because of the existence of shareholders, pretty much anything non indie is going to be profiting off exploitative rich people with generally loads of prejudice against marginalised groups. Even indie games you’re kinda stuck, look at factorio for example. Or you’re supporting the storefront. There may be ways to consume games ethically maybe but there’s always a catch somewhere. Informing consumers of these choices is important, but judging them for it is reductive considering the only winning move is not to play.