That part’s wild to me, when people are like “This villain in your story seems to have said and done bad things? So that means you agree with them, yes?” No! Of course not! It’s the literal villain in the story, man!

But there is no utilitarian point of art. It exists to express ideas and to tell truth. I think maybe a lot of people get upset because from their point of view, they are paying money, and they have this relationship where it’s like “If it’s not giving me what I wanted out of this transaction, then it’s bad.”

[–] Justas@sh.itjust.works 30 points 5 months ago (1 children)

To be honest, “If it’s not giving me what I wanted out of this transaction, then it’s bad.” is a heuristic that works well for most things we buy. If I buy candy and it doesn't taste good, it's bad. If I buy a car and it breaks down, it's bad.

I think the real problem is that some people see games as a product and others see it as an art piece. Some games fail at being either, some succeed at both.

[–] lath@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

A thread of the problem is likely the publisher/developer conflict of interest. When the two can't come to an agreement, the end result usually fails horribly in both aspects.

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

I hate those people who take content for validation. If I have a nazi in my story I am not, myself, also a nazi.