You might be happy with Minetest, but that doesn't change the fact that the
non-free world has much better games than the free world in much greater
numbers.
Games are a tough category to win at with freedom. Any two games are usually
sufficiently different that one cannot easily replace the other. SuperTux
doesn't stop people from wanting to play Super Mario Bros, for example;
differences that would be simple adaptation for programs designed to do work
are what make SuperTux and Super Mario Bros completely different games in the
eyes of players. This means that the non-free world necessarily having more
games than the free world is more noticeable than for any other type of
program.
Another problem is the non-free world keeps churning out more and more games
like a factory. A lot of gamers are used to this now, and they would be
disappointed to not have this in the free world. But this isn't easy to
achieve; it happens in the non-free world because there are tons of indie
game developers.
With that in mind, what we really need is a social change: we need to
convince indie developers to take the extra step of releasing their source
code and applying a free/libre software license. There are a lot of
challenges involved in this, most notably the misguided notion of source code
being "art" that they don't want people to "tamper with", but it's what we
need to happen for the gaming landscape of the free world to be even remotely
as good as the gaming landscape of the non-free world. Adding a couple free
games is good; it makes transition to the free world a little easier for some
people, but for every free game made by us, hundreds of non-free games are
made by indie developers.
