[ImprobableTruth]

>Is it right to say that developing a video game is "leisurely"? Isn't the game development industry notorius for long hours, stress and endless crunch time?

Game development as an industry job isn't leisurely. But indie game development that you're essentially only doing for yourself? It's like woodworking. Professional carpentering isn't leisurely, creating private pieces that you don't intend to make money with is.

>Is it righteous for those in well paying and value generating jobs to avoid going for even more well paying jobs?

Yes? It's about taking support (thus depleting resources that could be used to e.g. help the needy) when you don't need to.

>You take the same view with all FOSS software volunteer work, and all non-profit/volunteer/charity work generally?

Volunteer work is different insofar as that it absolutely has economic value (people would pay you for it if you weren't doing it for free out of your own volition), you just choose to give it away freely. An indie developer who could make money to sustain themselves but chooses not to would fall under the same category. Someone who wants to be an indie developer but doesn't because they know that they wouldn't make enough money is not in this category.

>What about a subsistence farmer who lives to grow food and eat it, are they "simply producing nothing of value to anyone but themselves"? Yes. Is that necessarily a problem?

Again, the issue is them wanting to be supported by others. Taking, but not providing when you can. If they can completely sustain themselves, that's great.

[jodrellblank]

I think I'm getting annoyed at the way you're framing it that the indie game development would be relaxing. Why assume that the commenter would want as their goal to make a game that nobody wants to play?

Why assume they are saying "I am sure I would make no money", when it could be "I can't be sure that I would make enough money"?

Assume they want to make a game that people like, then it becomes volunteer work that has economic value, in as much as people often pay for games they like.

> "Again, the issue is them wanting to be supported by others. Taking, but not providing when you can. If they can completely sustain themselves, that's great."

Curious if you also take this view about shareholders and land owners and such?