I've seen fucked up superheroes.

And I think you want other people's money to fund shows that you want to watch., all under the dubious guise of "public service".

That's actually another thing:

So those licenses are only a fraction of their revenue?

Oh good, personal insults. Guess I won.

I wouldn't say "worthwhile" so much as "solvent".

Easy to trivialize freedom when it's not your freedom that's being put at risk.

"the BBC is the world's oldest broadcaster"

There are numerous avenues these days towards securing funding, none of which require people to spend money they don't want to spend. Why is your compulsory funding necessary?

No, it's just for video games that you personally want to see made. In the era of Kickstarter, I'm very suspicious of anyone who claims that they can't find financial support.

And if the rest of us don't feel like paying for your pet projects?

Tell me more about television licenses.

Please, tell me more about how public funding for video games you want to see made is juuuuusssst like the police.

"That could not be made otherwise"

And if you don't want BBC programming?

So basically you want to use other people's money to make games that appeal to your own personal causes.

And are those video games funded via video game licenses?

I get it. It's a sort of politically palatable "Ministry of Truth" that safeguards the proles from dangerous ideas.

I'm sure they have a bullet point that says "We don't advocate", but when you treat video games as a public service you're essentially embracing the medium as a means of disseminating a certain message. That would be all well and good if it was funded by private money, but you're insinuating using public money and…

Not surprised that public funding of "games" that advocate public good causes is a wet dream of a Kotaku writer.