Comment by AlexandrB | Hacker News Reader

Comment by AlexandrB | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That's irrelevant. Both software and music are:

    * infinitely reproducible for near zero marginal cost
    * subject to changing tastes and style
    * easily obtainable through illegal means

This is especially true for games. Many software companies seem to have solved this dilemma by becoming surveillance or advertising companies that happen to make software. Games have solved it by peddling an increasing quantity of paid, high-margin add-on content and integrating gambling mechanics into their products. I hope the solution musicians come up with isn't as slimy as these.

Edit: I also find that most people treat most music as a commodity much of the time. Why else would random feeds of related music be so popular?

If you stop playing the huge AAA games and start playing smaller ones, you see another solution: lower prices for games that can be finished in an amount of time that fits into the busy life of an adult, and very often a grant from a national art fund.

Not for American games, of course, we basically destroyed the National Endowment for the Arts, thanks a lot guys.

I prefer art not selected by the government.

"Finishing" a game is a weird concept. I don't know anyone who finished chess.

Small games aren't necessarily cheaper than big ones; it depends on popularity to sustain a low unit price.

Chess doesn't have a narrative arc - unless I've been playing it wrong

And the King, having vanquished his foe at great cost, surveyed the empty field and muttered: "It matters not, for in the end the claw chooses who will go and who will stay".

> I prefer art not selected by the government.

That's not even remotely how most art grants work though? The selection process in most (democratic) countries is quite detached from the government.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com