lol the difference of course being that Phil Spencer is not living on the income of a standup comedian.
If nothing else, it keeps an anticapitalist narrative in the public discourse
Time will tell. I mean, he's not wrong. I think it's pretty clear that studios have to make profitable games at the cost of interesting games. But it's not like msft or anyone else is going to change their behavior. They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to profit as much as possible.
![Phil Spencer blames capitalism for games industry woes: 'I don't get [the] luxury of not having to run a profitable growing business'](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/ad52be4c-4529-48df-ae10-9135c073f0f7.jpeg?format=jpg&thumbnail=256)
It's PR. Anti-capitalist sentiments score well in focus groups.
Wouldn't these sentiments lead to expectations and then actual changes in policies?
As long as the policy changes lead to even more profits, then sure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHEOGrkhDp0#t=1m19s
lol the difference of course being that Phil Spencer is not living on the income of a standup comedian.
If nothing else, it keeps an anticapitalist narrative in the public discourse
Time will tell. I mean, he's not wrong. I think it's pretty clear that studios have to make profitable games at the cost of interesting games. But it's not like msft or anyone else is going to change their behavior. They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to profit as much as possible.