Why a Developer is Asking Fans to Boycott His Own Game on Xbox: The Politics of Platform Protest

Imagine working for years to create a game, finally seeing it launch on a major console, and then asking your fans not to buy it. This is the reality for indie developer Dan DiIorio, who in December 2025 requested a boycott of the Xbox version of his own acclaimed title, Luck Be a Landlord. Framed as a direct political protest, his action spotlights a contentious new trend: indie developers leveraging their platform access as a tool for geopolitical activism. What drives a creator to willingly sacrifice revenue? In an industry dominated by corporate giants, can such a protest make a difference? And as gaming becomes increasingly intertwined with global politics, what does this mean for the future of our consoles and storefronts?

The Luck Be a Landlord Boycott Announcement

On December 18, 2025, Dan DiIorio issued a clear statement to his audience: he asked fans not to purchase Luck Be a Landlord on Xbox. His motivation was explicitly political—a boycott of Microsoft, citing the company’s perceived support for Israel in the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict.

DiIorio didn’t just make a verbal request. To underscore his commitment and materially counter the financial flow, he announced a personal $10,000 donation to The Palestine Children’s Relief Fund. He framed this donation as an effort to “offset” revenue his game had already generated for Microsoft, attempting to redirect funds from a corporation he opposes to a cause he supports.

His protest also looked beyond his own game’s sales. DiIorio broadened the call to action, encouraging players to cancel their Xbox Game Pass subscriptions. This move targeted Microsoft’s flagship service, aiming to amplify the financial and reputational impact from a single transaction to an ongoing revenue stream, transforming a personal stance into a wider consumer mobilization.

Not an Isolated Incident: The Precedent of Tenderfoot Tactics

Dan DiIorio’s stand is striking, but it is not an outlier. It is part of an emerging pattern of developer-led platform protest, establishing a precedent that gives his action deeper context.

Just months earlier, in April 2025, the developers of the tactical RPG Tenderfoot Tactics took an even more definitive step. They didn’t just ask for a boycott; they pulled their game from the Xbox store entirely. Their statement aligned directly with the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement, with the developers stating they hoped Microsoft would "stop all business with the criminal Israeli military."

Both actions are rooted in the prolonged backdrop of the conflict in Gaza, which at the time of these decisions had been ongoing for 18 months. These developers are explicitly connecting their work in digital entertainment to real-world events, using their games—and their access to Microsoft’s commercial ecosystem—as instruments of protest. DiIorio’s boycott call is not a lone voice but a second, resonant note in a developing chorus of dissent from within the indie community.

The Games at the Center of the Storm

To understand the weight of these protests, it’s important to look at the games themselves. These aren’t faceless assets; they are passion projects with dedicated followings.

Luck Be a Landlord, first released on PC in 2023 and ported to consoles in 2025, is a uniquely clever roguelike that masquerades as a slot machine. Its strategic depth and addictive loop earned it critical praise and a cult fanbase. Its cultural impact is perhaps best underscored by its direct inspiration for the 2024 breakout hit Balatro, a game that took the genre to commercial and critical heights.

Tenderfoot Tactics is a different beast—a surreal, low-poly tactical RPG known for its deep, free-form combat system. Its removal from Xbox deprived players of a niche but deeply respected experience.

The potential impact of these actions is nuanced. These are not Call of Duty or Fortnite; their absence will not crater Microsoft’s quarterly earnings. However, that’s precisely what makes the gesture significant. The choice of these particular games is crucial. As celebrated, artist-driven projects, their boycott or removal isn't just a financial transaction; it's the withdrawal of artistic endorsement. It signals that for the indie community, a platform's value is increasingly measured not just by its audience size, but by its perceived ethical alignment.

The Ripple Effects and Unanswered Questions

The immediate consequence, as noted in the wake of these actions, is that this movement is "causing problems for Xbox" and is expected to continue into 2026. The problems are multifaceted: reputational damage from being cast as a complicit entity in a global conflict, fractures in developer-platform relationships, and a subtle erosion of the Xbox store’s content ecosystem.

For players, it introduces an unprecedented political dimension to buying a game. The choice is no longer just about genre or price; it’s now, for some titles, a potential ethical referendum on a platform holder’s business practices.

This trend forces critical questions about efficacy and ethics. Does the boycott or removal of a few niche indie titles materially impact a trillion-dollar corporation like Microsoft? The direct financial hit is likely negligible. The protest’s power is primarily symbolic, aiming to stain the brand’s image and inspire wider solidarity. This leads to the core ethical debate: Should game platforms be arenas for geopolitical protest? Developers argue they have a right to control where their art is sold, especially if they believe the seller is implicated in human suffering. Critics and many players contend that gaming should remain an escape, and that platforms are neutral storefronts, not political entities. The line between corporate responsibility and consumer expectation has never been so blurred.

The actions of developers like Dan DiIorio and the Tenderfoot Tactics team mark a pivotal shift. We are witnessing the weaponization of platform access, where the game itself becomes both the vehicle for and the casualty of protest. This trend signifies a growing expectation for corporate ethical accountability and a remarkable willingness among creators to bear personal financial loss for their principles. As we look ahead, one thing is clear: the era of the platform as a politically neutral digital shelf is over. The new, unsettled question is what responsibilities—to developers, players, and the world—come with being the owner of the storefront.

Tags: Indie Games, Xbox, Game Development, Video Game Industry, Politics in Gaming