[mjg2]

Ostensibly what u/skibidithink replied. We should have a healthy distrust of international corporations giving for unapparent reasons beyond being in the same sector. We can gesture about how a gift has no obligations, but no one gets into business to not make money, and true charity is without obligation.

ConcernedApe donated to give back to the foundation he came from, while Epic is out for global domination in the virtual entertainment sector.

[squigz]

Epic - like every other company in the world right now, particularly tech companies - was built on open-source software. Just because they may or may not have used those specific tools does not mean their desire to give back to that community is evil.

I'm really still just trying to see the whole "Epic is donating money to take over the world!" argument here. What obligation do they get from these donations, exactly?

[1123581321]

Tim Sweeney also has indie game developer roots; can’t he give to projects in the same spirit as how he started?

[drfuzzy89]

Sure, and maybe he does. I think there's a difference between Epic doing it as a company, for which they would likely expect to extract some value from the contribution, and Sweeney doing it as an individual.

[madeofpalk]

They’re both making self-serving donations. There’s nothing wrong with that.