A. It was a cynical cash grab that was totally transparent about being such.
B. It was a personal game that used the frame of a cynical cash grab to discuss personal themes.
This game was written more than a decade ago. Anna Anthropy was part of the early so-called "queer personal games" Twine scene, which I think fell apart after some controversy. The past notwithstanding, I liked this game, which is to some degree about the pains of being known solely for "queer personal games". Everyone is talking about how brave you are for making them, even though you may be increasingly cynical about whether it's just another marketing niche you've been pigeonholed into, the "brand" that defines you and your audience. And bad things result when your online "thing" becomes taking all your secrets and personal life details, all your trauma and painful memories, and publishing them for your audience. Making yourself vulnerable for profit. But you have to do it to live, and so many people aren't even famous as artists, and aren't you lucky?
"why are you still in this field when most of the women in games you know have already quit? do you ever worry about being left behind? do you ever feel like you'd be accomplishing more in another field?"
"must you always compare yourself to other women? isn't that exactly what the patriarchy wants us to do, to set us against each other?"
"if you're making games "for yourself," why do you care so much about who else plays them? (hint: you're not making games for yourself. don't even.)"
There's self-awareness and self-hatred about how this seems to be the only path forward. But what other paths can there be?