No, remember, it only makes sense if you are consumer-brained

Less live service games = less consooming. Some people literally don’t care about things that are in their best interest, they will happily pay $120 for a game that has pay2win microtransactions and requires a monthly subscription and will also shutdown after 18 months, as long as there is a new one to buy after it.

It makes sense if you are completely consumer-brained and only see it as “companies will make less (live service) games if they are forced to support them/let them be community supported”

No, there was definitely some criticism before. Prior to this month, it wouldn’t be unusual to hear people complain about how it would destroy the live service market and was therefore Bad Actually for games and game preservation

The topic getting much more mainstream just brought all those people with.

it gets the same label as a game pumped out of Grok and uploaded untouched

speaking about hypothetical events as if they were real is unhinged

even if I accept your premise of a “brainwashed NeoLuddite mob,” you’re still wrong on the simple principle of arguing against a company properly labeling what their product is or how it was made.

Nice strawman Dorothy