This is stuff that should be available on release day for all fps games. I can’t believe companies keep getting away with releasing beta version of games as a full release.
My friend told me about this earlier and that’s exactly what I thought. They knew this wouldn’t be popular and would drop the value so they sold before the announcement, that’s got to be insider trading
Now the share price will drop and he will buy his share back at a discount. Then they will revert the policy and share prices will rise. Boom! Free monies!
I think the part where they had a trend of selling over the course of a year makes this not insider trading (or harder to prove if they were playing the long game).
They probably have automated sell of dates or automated sell of prices.
This is part of a consistent pattern over the last year.
He probably hasn’t bought any stocks due to receiving stock as part of his employment contract.
It could be insider trading, but considering how companies have been doing pricing structures and rapid shifts from free to subscription based and then seeing sales/profit increase I imagine it’s worth it for them to simply keep the stock long term, but an initial sell off was put in place at a certain price. Sometimes there’s smoke and there’s fire, and sometimes it’s just simply the fumes of capitalism creating a system that’s uniquely imbalanced for everyone else, but isn’t really insider trading.
I feel like a scheduled sell shouldn’t mean insider trading investigation is off the table.
Does it really matter if they decided to sell just before they devalue their company, or they devalued their company right after a sell? They knew about both before hand, and they can have the same intent either way.
I suppose, but that’s a different crime under a different statute Im guessing. (Tanking the company because gou have a scheduled sell, versus selling because you tanked the company.)
They’ve been consistently selling off stock for the last year as noted in the article. Many of these execs get paid in a combination of cash and shares. To get their full wage they sell shares.
No, as the article says they’ve been doing it all year. Many execs and important employees often get paid a big chunk of their wage in stock. To get cash they need to sell stock.
As much as I have loved FF and other Square Enix franchises since I was a child, as of late, I feel like they want to continually disrespect their fan base. I should be clear that I am not anti-capitalist, by all means, they work in those games and deserve to be paid (even more so the devs to be compensated fairly), that said, there have been this trend over there in the last years, imo, that it’s ok to release unfinished games and sell you the complete version of this games either on dlcs which … not ok, but still manageable, or making you purchase a whoooole new game, sometimes not even being available on one console or the other, just to enjoy the game as originally intended. I’m looking at DQXI, and FFXV, which I love, both of them and feels like a F you to buy a whole complete 60$ game just for added content (not extra, part of the main story) or features.
So, came FFXVI, I decided I’m not a little kid anymore that can’t wait for something, also have already a monstrous backlog from years since I don’t have the time to play so much anymore and I can wait one or two years till they release of, inevitably, the finished/revised version: FFXVI “Royal” “Plus” “Definitive” or whatever “cute” name they are going to slap on that to justify the re-purchase.
Want that couch? It’ll take your sim 4 real time weeks to earn it with their pay, or you could just spen $15 in real dollars and get it now. Another for the guest room, or because you lost the first in a cooking fire? $15 more, please.
I’ve basically never seen a free to play title cost less than a paid one (for similar content). Typically free to play has some sort of completely uncapped money-sink as well. Given that Sims 4 already costs $500+ for all content, I can only surmise that Sims 5 will cost thousands for the same amount of content.
Unity had made their plans clear. Whether they backtrack a bit now or not doesn’t matter. We know what direction they are heading: squeeze more money out of indie devs
That's correct. Even with this backtrack, it's a safe bet that they'll likely re-introduce this same policy with different wording once they believe their consumers have calmed down.
The controlling shares of Unity are held by a trifecta of private equity and venture capital organizations. That’s why this is happening. It’s a classical presentation of the (short-term) profit über alles enshitification cycle.
The insider transaction history for Unity Software Inc shows a clear trend: over the past year, there have been 49 insider sells and no insider buys. This could be a red flag for potential investors, as it suggests that those with the most intimate knowledge of the company's operations and prospects are choosing to sell their shares
Or it just means they see it as compensation and are selling for taxes and expenses, not because they are worried about the long term direction of the company.
Ehh, the top folks at Google were all selling their maximum-permitted amount every window they got for a decade and the stock held up.
You typically don’t need to buy shares as an insider, the company just prints more gambling slips – er, I’m sorry, non-transferrable stock options – and hands them out.
Yes, but it doesn’t rise to the level of “insider trading,” which means using internal-only information to make trading decisions. If they sell these stocks regularly, on a schedule, in the same quantity, it’s not insider trading.
And that’s exactly what they’re doing, you can see their trades, and they’re consistent for about the same amount. So they’re not trading because of changes going on internally, they’re trading based on a schedule, probably because they need cash flow for some reason. My guess is taxes for their stock compensation.
I really only want the house building. I had a blast in Sims 2-4 building my dream house and trying out floor plans, optimizing flow of everyday life and just the architecture/design aspects of making it look good. Sadly they always hit limitations which took the fun out of it due to not being able to build like you wanted. Especially roofs were tricky or impossible to get to look good. And slanted roofs wasn’t in any base game and I didn’t buy DLC (and haven’t played 4 in like 5 years+).
If someone could make an house architect game I’d so love it! Build a house for a family of 4 with a budget of X with these bullet point demands. Then get scored on stuff like usable sq footage, how well the bullet points got satisfied etc.
what you’re searching for is a game called house flipper. it’s on steam, and after reading your post I am 100% confident you will love it and should look it up.
Cool game and thanks for the recommendation! But the first one is only focused on renovations and while it’s fun to reimagine a space I’m not at all interested in the nitty gritty of renovations. I have my own house and have done a fair bit of renovation work so doing it in a sim game would be dreadful, I’ve never understood the whole genre of “do menial labour but as a game!” Like Euro Truck Simulator and it’s ilk.
The coming second game however talks about building a house from scratch as well which does sound promising! If the build process isn’t too time consuming and smooth it might be great. So I’ll for sure check that out once it’s out!
There’s no way they can stop install bombings. There’s gonna be something that they rely on that can be changed somehow, and even if they find a way to perfect it, how could any developer trust that it’s flawless?
This is bad even if everything did work and everything was flawless. They’ve wrecked their trust here.
Godot is also an alternative and it's free/open source so no worries about the company completely changing how they charge you in the future and destroying all the work you have done for years.
I love the rage over this. You’ve all clearly never met most of the people playing this game. They already spend hundreds on DLC, it’s the majority of the game.
Yeah, I know a Sims player and Sims 4 is literally the only game she plays. The way you or me would buy a new game, she buys a DLC. It's like it is its own gaming ecosystem for most of its players.
But it’ll be worse now. It won’t be the same as 4, but free. It’ll be a glorified store with constant popups begging for money
It says a lot that it’s “running alongside” the previous game. You must not have a lot of faith in your game if you’re expecting your sequel to not replace the previous game.
They’re still exploiting their customers who’ve been developing products based on a completely different fiscal agreement; you can’t just change engines after years of work.
The worst isn’t even people currently developing things - it’s developers who already have released products. Imagine if you released something like, over the summer, for example. You’ve been paying the current revenue share, and will continue to do so until Jan. 1, then you’ll start paying the per-install fee. So you’re paying twice for the same customers’ purchases.
I really feel like they're going to lose a lawsuit on that.
Unilateral contracts don't have unlimited power and "we can blanket change what we want to charge you on games already made" doesn't seem like it's going to be enforceable.
Thankfully paradox are making a contender. Although paradox overdoes kt with dlc, too, but they’re not a scummy company like ea so it should be better. Plus they’re trying to take marketsharr from es so doing the exact same thing would be counterproductive.
Usually Paradox has some content DLC but the vast majority is cosmetic, so you don’t have to buy it but that money fuels their development of future content. Also with every content DLC they almost always release updates and extra content for free for the base game, I feel that Paradox is one of the only companies that do DLCs right.
Also they always allow mods, and a lot of their cosmetic DLCs can be immigrated by mods, so it’s not like they block people from doing what they want with their game just to shove cosmetics.
For me for a game like Sims I need a big variety of cosmetics to keep me playing, new game mechanics are kind of secondary.(Although, if I trust any company to recognize that and adjust accordingly it’d be paradox) But still, you are completely right, paradox doesn’t abandon players that don’t buy the dlc but release content patches at the same time. Plus if you happen to play with other people only one person needs to own the dlc, which is one of my favourite things paradox does and more companies should do.
Also, I completely forgot about mod support. That makes a huge difference, too.
eurogamer.net
Najnowsze