back

by masswerk·12y ago·view on hn ↗
So, if I get this right, you're saying, you don't care for 2048, because you do not care for the game's original idea being developed in the first place?
1 comments
I don't understand where you get the idea that I "don't care for 2048" when I explicitly called it a "gem".
The argument would be like, "if I don't care, if original ideas are being developed for games (and, if I don't care, if it's viable to do so), I don't care for the games, I enjoy."
Sorry, but I'm afraid I can't understand your comment at all. Could you rephrase?
I would propose that a substantial argument was made in this post: You're mentioning that most of the games in the stores would be BS, lacking creativity, just hunting for in-app-purchases, etc. Now, if you're enjoying a creative idea, it wouldn't be totally out of scope to care, if it would be viable for anyone to come up with it. "[B]ut couldn't be bothered" didn't sound like this to me at all. Free software is a nice thing, but it just doesn't pay, unless it's just a hobby. If you would want someone to invest in original ideas, I'm afraid, it's not the best long term strategy to go for free clones.
Threes doesn't look all that interesting to me. I didn't care to try it out when I first heard of it, and 2048 didn't change that opinion. I'm not going to go out and buy a different game just to support the concept when I'm enjoying something else that by all accounts is not really the same game.