Whatever assumption you want to lie to yourself is truth.
No you're right. I'm being stupid. Companies don't want profits. Developers don't want profits either! Silly me, my bad.
Linking me to his post that says nothing of pressure doesn't prove you right. He believes he's sparing Obsidian a PR nightmare. Not himself.
He didn't change his opinion, yet felt pressured into changing his content due to the PR nightmare that some people were creating.
Oh, it's free speech you don't understand. You can demand all you like. That still doesn't force a dev to do anything. I can demand you stop posting right now and it wouldn't force you to do a darn thing differently.
I actually just face palmed. You must actually be trolling. Genuinely. You cannot honestly think saying:
do not imagine for a second you have the right to demand the artist changes it to conform to your tastes. That is my point.
= Not a free speech / artistic freedom defense.
Pressuring people to censor themselves or change their content is fundamentally infringing upon their right to free speech and artistic freedom. It is not governmental action, that does not mean it isn't infringing upon their rights.
"pressure". You're treating devs like children incapable of making their own decision. Twitter doesn't force anything. "Pressure" is a fact of life. Every last person complaining about X gun on Call of Duty is pressuring devs jsut as much.
The devs didn't make their own decision though, they asked the backer to make the call and he did. I'm not calling them kids, anybody would be terrified if a random mob of people decided to start calling them hateful bigots. It isn't childish to be terrified of an irrational mob.
Every last person complaining about X gun on Call of Duty is pressuring devs jsut as much.
Theoretically yes. It's entirely different as asking for X content vs rallying behind political correctness have entirely different political connotations. But I fundamentally disagree with anyone who seeks to force a developer to conform to their will, whether it be a content change or otherwise.
"Facts". Likelihood is a fun one too, since it just so happens to conform to 'the skeletons are taking away mah games'
Burn down that strawman! Pointing out the suspicious nature of an incident does not make me paranoid, it makes me entirely rational. You're acting irrational by willfully ignoring the context of the scenario and taking everything literally.
No, use your brain. They can always refund him as long as they have the money. They still hold the ultimate decision.
But they didn't use that ultimate decision here, they gave that responsibility to him. That is a fact. By the Gods.
No, I just admitted you can't understand what I'm saying and falsely interpret it as a double standard. More likely you're just not reading what I'm writing given how I've repeated myself.
I ask why you have a double standard. You respond with
Because you're incapable of understanding it apparently.
You didn't say you aren't holding a double standard. You just said I don't understand why you're holding one - which is entirely true. Freudian slip on your part?
More likely you're just not reading what I'm writing given how I've repeated myself.
Or we've hit a stalemate because you refuse to deal with the fundamental context and facts surrounding this circumstance, and like focusing on strawmen rather than my actual argument. But hey-ho, there isn't anything I can do about that.