Not that difficult to say no to an abusive company.
It is very hard to say no to an abusive company. I guarantee you purchase something from an abusive company. You’re not going to consumerism your way our of consumerism.
There is extremely limited entertainment that is not based on abuse. It gets worse obviously outside of entertainment but I think you’d have a hard time naming any entertainment company of scale that isn’t abusive.
Then there’s the fact that you’d be using a device built on abuse to play the entertainment.
This is always just some corporate propaganda so entrenched that you think you can not buy a product to make change. Yet companies like Nestle can be well known for seeing water as a luxury and using literal child saves to harvest cocoa while being profitable year after year.
Game studios like Blizzard need labor rights and unions not people saying they’ll hold them accountable online by not buying a video game while Diablo 4 becomes one of the fastest selling games of all time. You’re just spending lip service to the corporate elite and chasing after a solution that doesn’t hold them accountable.
Yes literally every screen, console and movie player is built on abuse, so let’s not do anything about the companies that do openly abuse their employees and customers. It’s all bad anyways so might as well do nothing with your thumb up your ass.
Nestle does horrible things and literally has killed children but let’s do nothing and buy their products anyways. Not like there are multiple nestle boycott groups all over the internet spreading awareness. No they are just wasting their time.
You can stand up against abuse from one company while being unable to do much about another.
Doing nothing gets you nowhere. I’m not saying choosing to support a company or not is the end all be all but it is the damn minimum you can do. Unions and laws against monopolies is what we need.
I don’t understand if you misread or are just too upset here but I never advocated for doing nothing. I advocated for doing something while consumerism is doing nothing. It’s the same bullshit plastic companies sold us about recycling and now the whole planet is covered in plastic.
I also don’t understand what the hell you mean about laws against monopolies, those exist and those are literally why MS didn’t buy ABK like a year ago. Oligopolies are just as problematic if not more problematic than monopolies.
You keep “standing up against abuse” by not buying video game. I hope I am wrong and it fixes everything.
I can understand this comment for something like an abusive mineral miner in Africa selling electronics parts, or a food corporation that makes shared ingredients. Video games, though, are much more of a finished product, and easy to find competition for.
All major game companies abuse their employees. I agree with not giving them money but it will do nothing. The way people fight abusive employers is with with unions and organizing not with giving money to the other company that abuses employees.
Diablo 4 made sales records amongst the most I have ever seen gamers saying they will boycott something. I want to be wrong, I want this to do something but I see absolutely no information to support that. Meanwhile I do see regulations and unions making change in the real world.
I was disappointed to hear allegations of toxic work environments in Moon Studios, the people who made indie darling Ori and the Blind Forest. So while abusive employers are certainly an important issue, it doesn’t appear to be one that’s specific to large companies. Furthermore, it was never going to get solved under the supervision of Bobby Kotick - a man who was never going to leave unless something like the Microsoft deal happened.
There’s lots of horrible companies in the world, and I salute anyone’s efforts to boycott the ones doing horrible shit. Part of the reason I’m ambivalent about the merger is, I don’t even buy (or care about the success of) Activision games. But I don’t see that as a topic directly relevant to corporate merging/growth. Two publishers merge, that hasn’t added to the amount of employee abuse going on in each of their studios.
Oh I mean “live services” that are broken on release, designed to charge you for everything and will be taking offline the moment it’s no longer profitable.
How about gamers stop throwing money away and enabling this shit company to absorb everything around it and making worse and worse games. But that won’t happen. Y’all have the conviction of sliced bread when it comes to preordering.
No one forced indie devs to put their games on gamepass, why is it my fault? I will pay for what I feel is worth my money, and gamepass has surpassed that ten fold. When they decide to go the way of netflix by jacking up prices and reducing offerings then I will stop paying for it just like I did with netflix.
Not sure what you are even on about, I don’t even own an xbox. I use gamepass on PC. I have other choices, I also have a Steam account with over 1000 games on it. You just sound like a jaded asshole.
Look at how Epic was doing business. They threw around hundreds of millions of dollars to buy exclusivity. And Epic was small time compared to MS. What happens when they do the same but on a larger scale? They buy exclusivity to Game Pass forever? They're already buying gaming powerhouses, indie games are a drop in the bucket.
This merger should be opposed by everyone. It's a dark sign of things to come. They've already shown they WILL cut out all competition once they buy competitors.
They kind of can't buy any competitors at this point. They got through this acquisition by the skin of their teeth and have to cool it, and after all that, I doubt this leads to a future where they've got a larger market share than PlayStation. There's also just far too much competition in the gaming space for them to approach a monopoly. Epic couldn't will their store into superiority over Steam, especially when they're not doing anything to solve problems for their customers, and Microsoft still has to make good products to get you to buy them too.
Eh, I'm not that hopeful. the FTC asked them questions but it was never really going to stop them. MS has the capital to buy Sony, if it was feasible to do so. I expect them to continue to buy stuff up until they are actually denied. They have the lawyers to throw at the government in perpetuity.
That's far more cynical than I can meet you at, and it's probably why the merger isn't "opposed by everyone". Microsoft is already dancing right up to the line of antitrust, though I suspect that if they're broken up, the video game division remains in one piece, not several.
Based off the article, it sounds like it was purchased quite recently as well. My personal guess is Embracer was buying up studios faster than it could support, counting on getting more funding down the line. Then Embracer had a deal fall through and realized they were laden with debt and had to drop the load.
Maybe Gearbox was giving the worst return on investment since it was such an expensive purchase which made it the prime target to sell.
Someone came along and said they'd like to buy them. Perhaps at an attractive offer given the deal that fell through or perhaps at an even higher price than Embracer paid for it. Anyone would consider a sale at a decent price if someone approached them with the offer.
Gearbox is also a publishing arm, which recently put out Remnant II, and they seem to have a stake or ownership in Risk of Rain, Bulletstorm, and Torchlight.
A lot of studios accepted the sale to Embracer because of the decentralized studio model. I hope they took into account the risk of a subsequent sale to a more centralized owner…
How is Embracer group a decentralized studio model? When ever I look them up I don’t get much information. I just hear them buying studios then shutting them down.
Each publisher operates independently. So far, to my knowledge, they've shut down studios that were spun up to work that $2B deal that fell through; and Volition, who haven't made a hit game in a decade.
This is actually new. They very rarely shut down studios until last month.
When THQ fell apart a about a decade ago, they bought the trademark and were doing business as THQ Nordic for quite a while.
Changed their name to Embracer a few years ago for clarity because, confusingly, one of their publishing arms is THQ Nordic GmbH.
As THQ Nordic (and later Embracer), they’ve been buying up studios (and IPs) for years. Being a holding company meant they were relatively hands off when it comes to development.
Being bought by them actually majorly increased job security, because they tended to just let studios do their shit, and kind of “understood” that a lot of their studios focus on relatively niche audiences, so they didn’t mind taking a financial hit here and there.
All that really mattered was whether or not the IP in general was profitable.
Then they had some sort of deal fall through or something earlier this year and that’s when things got a little shaky. Basically, they lost a couple billion dollars and now need to make “cost-saving measures”.
Now the commercial failures and lack of interest in certain IPs means less job security than it did about a year ago.
This makes me worried about Eidos Montréal and Crystal Dynamics. Particularly Deus Ex, since it was looking like Eidos might eventually get to finish its Human Revolution/Mankind Divided trilogy.
Their strategy was always diversifying in ways that other big publishers stopped diversifying, buying old neglected and mismanaged IPs for pennies on the dollar. If this strategy doesn't work, then I weep for what video games could have been, because this lack of diversification is why I can't get a decent racing game or first person shooter anymore.
Yeah, I was really happy when they got Eidos and Crystal Dynamics out of Square’s hands. Deus Ex continuation finally looked like a possibility.
Losing Eidos would be especially bad for those of us who are fans of immersive sims.
And with Deep Silver, they excelled in giving us the great Eurojank RPGs we know and love (I’ll still die on the hill that Risen is an entertaining trilogy, probably because of the major tone shift after the first game).
I always treat Wikipedia as a first stop for a general overview under the caveat that not all information may be accurate or complete. From there, I typically use google to look up more info on specific events and such, or sometimes check the referenced sources if they’re available.
Internet Archive is not Library Genesis, the two organizations have very different functions and should be structured very differently.
Internet Archive is for preserving data, not necessarily distributing it as widely as possible. If distributing the data puts the preservation of that data at risk then don't distribute it, keep it stashed safely away. Maybe a decade or two from now things will change and they'll have the only copies, and keeping them snugly away out of sight will have been vital to preserving them after that point. Internet Archive has a public corporate presence that makes it easy to donate to and easy to run their servers, but also makes them easy to sue. So avoid doing anything that gets you sued.
Library Genesis, on the other hand, is piracy central. Their mandate is distributing this stuff and sticking their thumbs in the eyes of the publishers. So they're structured entirely differently. They run on the shady side of the internet, making them hard to donate to but also hard to sue. They should be the ones "fighting the fight" right now. It would be sad if they got taken down but not an irrecoverable tragedy, a new Library Genesis can rise again.
Internet Archive are being idiots by poking the bear like they have been lately, it's like they're carrying a precious irreplaceable baby and they've decided to take a run through a minefield. I hope they learn from this debacle.
Yeah, you know, that [checks notes] one copy of a book that the lending library was able to lend* was really eating into their profit margin. Honest to God, they probably spent more money on lawyers over this shit than they’ll ever recoup, and it just makes them look stupid, greedy, and stupidly greedy.
*I think it’s one copy per actually book that’s owned. Just like you can’t lend you friends more copies of a given book than you own.
The publishers have called the Archive’s program a front for mass copyright infringement.
Digital libraries are a front for mass copyright infringement, according to the publishers :)
But for real, what’s the difference between a digital library that artificially limits the amount of books they lend out to the amount of books they scan and a traditional library? I can go to my local library right now, take a book home, photocopy the book at home, and return the book to the library. Not as high quality as a digital copy, but still.
Remember the time Sony Music installed a rootkit on peoples' computers via commercially purchased CDs because hacking paying customers' computers seemed like a good way to combat piracy?
Sony BMG initially denied that the rootkits were harmful. It then released an uninstaller for one of the programs that merely made the program's files invisible while also installing additional software that could not be easily removed.
And then they just paid some settlements, recalled some CDs, and continued to operate as if nothing has happened. Bloody hell.
I remembered there was a Part II to the story that made it even worse, but did not remember those details. Should have read my own link! Thanks for highlighting that because it truly is the icing on the cake.
Ponieważ jak dotąd nie wynaleziono żadnej innej skutecznej metody na walkę o kwestie społeczne jak działania radykalne. I to dotyczy niemal każdej dziedziny począwszy od walki o prawa kobiet, poprzez walkę z apartheidem skończywszy na kwestiach ekologicznych. Tylko akty “wandalizmu” są skuteczne.
Akty wandalizmu to jest woda na młyn dla przeciwników ekologii, to metody rewolucjonistów z XIXw kiedy semolowano fabryki i niszczono maszyny które odbierały prace robotnikom. Teraz sa inne możliwości, thinktanki, partie zielonych, inicjatywy społeczne, demokracja daje dużowiecej sposobów niż oblewanie zupą obrazów i przyklejanie do asfaltu.
“Akty wandalizmu to jest woda na młyn dla przeciwników ekologii, to metody rewolucjonistów z XIXw kiedy semolowano fabryki i niszczono maszyny które odbierały prace robotnikom” Takie oczywiste dziś kwestie jak zakaz pracy dzieci czy 8-godzinny dzień pracy wywalczyły ruchy robotnicze właśnie tymi “wandalizmami”. I były krytykowane przez konserwatystów tymi samymi psudoargumentami jakie tu powtarzasz. …org.pl/…/jak-niemieckim-anarchistom-zawdzieczamy…
mmm… bardzo bym chciał, żeby te cywilizowane i łagodne metody w pełni wystarczały. Ale prawda jest taka, że do świadomości publicznej protesty przedostają się tylko wtedy kiedy są masowe, albo kiedy w jakiś sposób szokują. Gdyby Greta albo policjanci z tego newsa byliby calutcy w sosie, albo posklejani ze sobą klejem epoksydowym, to nie musiałbym się fatygować z tłumaczeniem - przebierałbym w źródłach. Tak samo jak porównasz protest z 4 czerwca z tym francuskim. W światowej prasie polski protest to był temat na dzień i to nie na pierwsze strony, tylko do mniejszych rubryk. A francuski? Bałem się lodówkę otworzyć. O tym że jacyś aktywiści oblali obraz (a w zasadzie to szybę, która ten obraz chroniła), wie dosłownie każdy, a była to akcja zaledwie paru osób. Choć istotnie - ja dzisiaj za cholerę nie pamiętam w jakiej sprawie była ta akcja i masz rację - robi to zły PR wszystkim aktywistom, nie tylko radykalnym. Jest to więc broń obu-sieczna i nie powinno się jej używać bezmyślnie.
Porównanie do robotników demolujących maszyny uważam za bezzasadne. Oblewanie szyb sosem, czy przyklejanie się do asfaltu nie pociąga za sobą znacznych strat materialnych. Jedyna wada jest taka, że zawracana jest gitara służbom, które mogłyby w tym samym czasie obsługiwać naprawdę potrzebujących.
Ależ straty materialne blokad sa, to sa wstrzymane loty w przypadku lotnisk, kilkadziesiąt lotów które zostałe wstrzymane to sa olbrzymie straty, rownież blokady dróg to straty dla transportu ogólnie dla gospodarki. Można organizować marsze, wiece i tam propagować idee walki z ociepleniem klimatu, zwłaszcza teraz gdy wybuchają masowopożaru klimat ku temu byłby sprzyjający. Zamiast sensownych argumentów do prasy przebijają sie informacje o możliwości amputacji ręki aktywisty który przykleił sie do asfaltu żywicą epoksydową
Zamiast sensownych argumentów do prasy przebijają sie informacje o możliwości amputacji ręki aktywisty który przykleił sie do asfaltu żywicą epoksydową
I to jest właśnie sedno problemu. Metody “barbarzyńskie” są skuteczne, bo samo społeczeństwo w swojej masie jest “barbarzyńskie”: większość ludzi nie dostawała w szkole samych piątek, nie czyta prac naukowych i nie będzie słuchać wypocin think-tanków. “OBRAZ W ZUPIE” - to są nagłówki, które przyciągają ich uwagę. No a w systemie demokratycznym niestety ich opinia ma niebagatelne znaczenie, chociażby dla populistycznych polityków.
Tak jak w poprzednim komentarzu, zaznaczę raz jeszcze, że życzę sobie i nam wszystkim, by społeczeństwo dojrzało, by metody cywilizowane i łagodne były wystarczające i żaden nie-radykalny aktywista nie czuł się olewany.
A na czym to nieokewanie polega przecież to jest szukanie na siłe atencji jak w reklamie co to wogóle za poziom przekazu równie dobrze mogliby reklamować proszek do prania
Zamiast sensownych argumentów do prasy przebijają sie informacje o możliwości amputacji ręki aktywisty który przykleił sie do asfaltu żywicą epoksydową
W prasie jest publikowanych multum sensownych artykułów z wypowiedziami ekspertów, które nikogo nie interesują. O tym jak dużym problemem jest antropogeniczne globalne ocieplenie eksperci i politycy wiedzą od lat 70. I od tego czasu jedyne co widać to gigantyczny lobbing korporacji blokujących jakiekolwiek rozwiązania klimatyczne.
Niepisze tylko o prasie, mysle o pokojowych demonstracjach. Protestach na uczelniach, przy okazji festynów koncertów i innych publicznych wydarzeń, zamiast niszczyć trzeba budować kształtować, walka na rozumy nie na pięści
Zazwyczaj jednak, żeby ktokolwiek zainteresował się tymi spokojnymi i racjonalnymi argumentami ktoś inny musi zrobić akcję radykalną. Na tym polega przesuwanie debaty publicznej. W efekcie naukowcy i aktywiści spokojnie mówiący o zagrożeniu AGO przesunięci zostają z pozycji radykałów na centrum i trafiają nawet do konserwatywnych mediów.
Jest dokładnie odwrotnie, te wygłupy aktywistów przyklejających sie do asfaltu którym grozi potem amputacja reki albo oblewajacy arcydzieła van Gogha przyćmiewaja rozsadne głosy ekspertów na rzecz ekologii i walki z ociepleniem klimatu
Każdy może pisać co chce, ale musi liczyć się z konsekwencjami. Wyzywanie aktywistów od idiotów, bo nie rozumiesz dla czego ryzykują takie działania nie jest u nas mile widziane. Prosimy o kulturę wypowiedzi i więcej wzajemnego szacunku.
Kulture oczekuje od wszystkich jak ci aktywisci wyzywaja innych to musza sie liczyć ze ktos tez ich wyzwie, to samo w dyskusji jak ktos nie umie zachowac sie kukturalnie to musi sie liczyć z odpowiednia reakcja
reuters.com
Gorące