Why is it considered a bad idea to allow people to develop games for which no equipment is needed?

Why is it considered a bad idea to allow people to develop games for which no equipment is needed?

• A. It increases consumption.
• B. It doesn't increase consumption.
• C. It requires expensive equipment.
• D. It leads to more violent behavior.

Answer: (B)

The main idea being tested is how making development easy by removing equipment barriers affects consumption. If anyone can create games without any gear, it lowers the entry barrier and expands who can contribute, but it doesn’t inherently push people to buy more goods or use more resources. In this scenario, development can happen with existing devices and digital distribution, so overall physical consumption doesn’t rise. The other options imply outcomes that don’t follow from “no equipment is needed”: it doesn’t require expensive gear, it isn’t automatically tied to more violent behavior, and the key point is that consumption wouldn’t increase.

The main idea being tested is how making development easy by removing equipment barriers affects consumption. If anyone can create games without any gear, it lowers the entry barrier and expands who can contribute, but it doesn’t inherently push people to buy more goods or use more resources. In this scenario, development can happen with existing devices and digital distribution, so overall physical consumption doesn’t rise. The other options imply outcomes that don’t follow from “no equipment is needed”: it doesn’t require expensive gear, it isn’t automatically tied to more violent behavior, and the key point is that consumption wouldn’t increase.