>>102837425That in itself wouldn't be a problem but there is also the "elephant in the room", two elephants even
1) the audience they courted is a "free to play" one which goes to extreme lengths to brag about NOT paying for the entertainment they consume
2) the audience they courted is an "irony pilled" one which, as well, goes to extreme lengths to disclose to the whole world that the entertainment they consume is just that and that they don't feel any attachment or obligation to the person providing it
1 + 2 means that, even if they scale their audience to a big enough number, and even if they put attractive products for sale to that audience, they won't buy it AND
>here is the worst partthey will INCESSANTLY MOCK those who do and spend money on entertainment they like
It's pretty much the 2020s version of pic related and there is not reconciling these two things
>keeping the audience at "arms length">expecting them to pay for usually overpriced products out of loyalty and attachment 