Wealth & Money Quote by Mike Wilson

Wilson is doing the unromantic math that sits behind every supposed creative revolution: attention is not a business model. The line lands because it punctures the common tech-era fantasy that a massive audience automatically produces a thriving market for quality. He’s not doubting that people will show up; he’s doubting they’ll open their wallets, and he’s tracing the downstream damage that follows when they don’t.

The comparison to Flash games is the tell. Flash was the golden age of frictionless play: instant access, endless novelty, and a culture trained to expect “free” as the default. That ecosystem birthed a lot of clever work, but it also rewarded speed and volume over craft. Wilson’s subtext is that a platform shaped by zero-price expectations selects for disposable design: short sessions, thin production values, and monetization hacks instead of expensive experimentation. In that world, “great games” aren’t impossible; they’re financially irrational.

There’s a second, sharper implication tucked into “good enough to have people pay for it.” He’s arguing that the payment problem isn’t only consumer stinginess; it’s a feedback loop. If you can’t charge, you can’t fund ambition. If you can’t fund ambition, you rarely produce the kind of depth that justifies charging. The result is a crowded bazaar of competent distractions, where the audience is huge precisely because nothing is asking much of them - including money.