7 HN users recommended this talk7 months2013–2020score 7.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
HN cites it repeatedly in debates about in-app purchases and monetization corrupting games.
Jonathan Blow's CreativeMornings talk arguing that business models shape game design, drawing an analogy between 1970s TV and HBO and between free-to-play and premium games. He calls for games that inspire awe rather than chase constraints.
“how the business model deeply corrupts the game through the metaphor of bad 70's TV shows vs HBO” (HN, 2013)
Jonathan Blow (Braid and Indie Fund) recently gave an amazing presentation on the evolution of Television, and he made an interesting parallel to the evolution of games: [this video]
Parallel between evolution of television and games.
If anyone wants to see a good example of why you can't just toggle off IAP you should check out Jonathan Blow's talk about "Free to Play" games and how the business model deeply corrupts the game through the metaphor of bad 70's TV shows vs HBO: [this video] The solution isn't to toggle IAP off in the game, it's the ability to toggle it off in the App Store. The difficulty is some IAP is legitimate and some is not. For example, Carcassonne has an IAP to upgrade the game into a slightly different game with additional tiles. It's only when the IAP is part of the core game mechanic that is troubling. I think categorising them and relegating them to a particular category like we do with FPS, RPG, RTS, etc.. would help.
How free-to-play business models corrupt games, via TV analogy.
Jonathan Blow -creator of Braid and working on The Witness- also has a very nice critique on the problems with games that are designed around micro-payments. The whole talk is interesting, but he starts discussing the issues around the 20 minute mark: [this video]
Critique of games designed around micro-payments, starting around minute 20.
I've followed Jonathan Blow for a while. He has a reputation for being condescending. If you follow him a Twitter then you might come to the same conclusion. But he has given some amazing talks. [this video] <-compares games to televison [link] [link] [link]
>It is almost certain you have or are playing a game I have produced or worked on in a major capacity. Maybe for a few minutes. I like to think I'm good at analysing game mechanics, as a long time gamer and sometimes amateur game designer. So I mostly avoid F2P games. The tactics are repulsive to my tastes, and I can smell them from a mile away. When there's a choice between struggling to meet a challenge by improving my skill, or paying my way though, my inclination is to take a 3rd choice: stop playing this and do something else. So I much prefer paying up front for a game. I'm old-school that way. Maybe this option is viable, as a 'serious' gaming hobbyist, only temporarily. But right now, the best games (in my genres of choice) are sold on the traditional purchase model. They are PC and console games. Generally, I don't like 'endless' games; I prefer a game to have an ending: I play it, experience it 'fully', finish it, then move on to something else. (But... just to undermine everything I've stated above, I am playing Pac Man 256. It has good gamefeel. I'll play it until I get all the powerups, perhaps. No interest in high-scores...) tl;dr: IMO F2P games are inferior instances of the artform. Be cool like me and play superior PC and console games. Also, Jonathan Blow has some interesting points to make on how the payment form of games (and entertainment in general) affects their structure/quality. This is the one where he talks about addictive mobile Skinner box games [x
Blow on how payment model shapes game quality, including mobile Skinner boxes.
While I disagree with the word dumb and find "ignorant" more suitable, your Candy Crush comparison is bad. Jonathan Blow nailed it in this presentation: [this video]
Blow's analysis rebutting a Candy Crush comparison.
There's an interesting talk about that by Jonathan Blow, using the common phrase 'The Medium is the Message'. The eventual topic is mobile game design but he starts off with TV and how commercial and other constraints influence show (and game) design. [this video]
How commercial constraints shape TV and mobile game design.
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
7 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more
Read more