I guess there is a max reply depth? So I am replying here...
I am a game developer, actually, and I believe games can have great social value. So I support you in pursuing your idea.
"Rewards" systems like the one described here, though, are not about giving anything to the audience. They are purely about taking money away from people, and doing it as manipulatively and sneakily as possible. I believe the net social value for things like this is deeply negative.
There's not a max reply length. The reply button takes a bit of time to show up sometimes. I'm not clear on how long that is supposed to be or what factors influence it. When I first joined, I did the exact same thing as you are doing here: Replied higher up in the thread on occasions when I couldn't find the "reply" link/button/option.
Thanks so much for taking me seriously. Sometimes people think I'm just being snarky. What do you think does work for trying to monetize a game? I'm not sure there will ever be any money in my plans to make a game (in part because the target audience has no money, only debts from large medical expenses), but my sons also want to make games. Somewhere in there, someone needs to make actual money. Any thoughts?
I am referring to Justice Potter Stewart's famous 1964 opinion statement in a Supreme Court case on pornography. Look up "I know it when I see it" on Wikipedia.
I'm familiar with "I know it when I see it". I just didn't realize it was a reference to that. Okay, presume I am blind (and stupid, if that helps): Why does this lack social value in your eyes?
For reference: I kind of have hopes of eventually doing a simulation (aka "game") to try to teach other people how I got well when doctors say it cannot be done. So I don't agree when people dismiss games and related topics as having no social value. I'm sincerely trying to understand your perspective.
Comments
I'm sorry. It's a sincere question and I simply don't understand. Does pornography also lack social value in your eyes?
I guess there is a max reply depth? So I am replying here...
I am a game developer, actually, and I believe games can have great social value. So I support you in pursuing your idea.
"Rewards" systems like the one described here, though, are not about giving anything to the audience. They are purely about taking money away from people, and doing it as manipulatively and sneakily as possible. I believe the net social value for things like this is deeply negative.
There's not a max reply length. The reply button takes a bit of time to show up sometimes. I'm not clear on how long that is supposed to be or what factors influence it. When I first joined, I did the exact same thing as you are doing here: Replied higher up in the thread on occasions when I couldn't find the "reply" link/button/option.
Thanks so much for taking me seriously. Sometimes people think I'm just being snarky. What do you think does work for trying to monetize a game? I'm not sure there will ever be any money in my plans to make a game (in part because the target audience has no money, only debts from large medical expenses), but my sons also want to make games. Somewhere in there, someone needs to make actual money. Any thoughts?
I am referring to Justice Potter Stewart's famous 1964 opinion statement in a Supreme Court case on pornography. Look up "I know it when I see it" on Wikipedia.
I'm familiar with "I know it when I see it". I just didn't realize it was a reference to that. Okay, presume I am blind (and stupid, if that helps): Why does this lack social value in your eyes?
For reference: I kind of have hopes of eventually doing a simulation (aka "game") to try to teach other people how I got well when doctors say it cannot be done. So I don't agree when people dismiss games and related topics as having no social value. I'm sincerely trying to understand your perspective.
Thanks so much for indulging me. :-)
Oh wait, now it lets me reply here. See above.