What are you talking about? They totally addressed that. Someone from HR even stepped down! /s
I used to work in a small Ubisoft studio, and while I was there one of the managers investigated an employee for sexual harassment. He took it super serious, and, as far as I can tell, did everything right. Then he took the case to HR and... Left the company about 6 weeks later.
The sexual harasser also left, eventually, but I think the order of things tells a story.
Hey beehaw, I’ve got the hottest off-the-press rumour for you today: I predict video game companies will continue to produce video games for the foreseeable future! Unbelievable, I know, but my insider knowledge tells me that companies often seek profit by providing goods and services.
i put very low stock in rumors, and i put even less on rumors reported by gamerant. No shade to you casey, I just think gamerant is a clickbait publication.
I never understand how these companies work. Aren’t they just getting portrayed even more negatively now? Sometimes I wonder if it’s just AI making these decisions behind the screen.
Even that doesn’t make sense though. How would people not have caught on when they were banning people but not telling them what for other than you violated some terms of service agreement?
The obvious next step would be to actually go look at the agreement.
So this outcome was 100% inevitable, and moreover 100% predictable. How else could it possibly have gone down.
I am surprised it was NetEase, as these kinds of policies are basically always from Japanese companies. Japan’s defamation laws are literal garbage that basically just protect big companies and abusers, so seeing a similar kind of clause from a non-Japanese company is quite strange. I mean, imagine a country whose defamation laws don’t care if something being said is true or not, if it damages the reputation of something even if it is true, then Japan’s law considers it defamation. Garbage.
I play some NetEase games (most notably Super Mecha Champions, its on Steam) and I have honestly been surprised that they are so welcoming of feedback. Most of their games literally have an option in the menus of the games to send feedback to the developers, positive or negative. They are fast to act on reports I have sent, and generally have been vastly less hatable than Tencent. So seeing that this happened was a shock to me. Glad they’re correcting the problem though.
This feels like Sega is running a science experiment to conclusively determine how much more money can be made from the live service format, with a control group and everything.
Im frequently been surprised by their choices for years, since at least 2005. Like some companies, you KNOW what they’re like. They do consistent impressive work like FromSoft, Nintendo, Valve. Some companies do consistent work that can be hit/miss, like Capcom. And others just do consistent work that gets a lot of shitty management decisions, like Ubisoft.
Sega doesn’t fit any of those buckets. No consistency except that they’re not consistent. You don’t know what a Sega title will bring. Like they rotate management every week.
Sega doesn’t fit any of those buckets. No consistency except that they’re not consistent. You don’t know what a Sega title will bring. Like they rotate management every week.
Yeah this is a result of Sega’s management strategy where all the employees line up outside in the morning along one of the business obstacle courses. Whoever can run through the course fastest and collect the most coins gets to be CEO for the day. Is it chaotic and ableist? Yeah sure, but it does ensure that if a bear attacked the office that Sega employees would be well trained to deal with the emergency. Also, it isn’t THAT much less efficient than having utterly useless out of touch CEOs running the company who don’t give a shit about their customers or the artistic merit of what they are making. At least with this system sometimes the good thing happens amid all the chaos.
Does Sega spend inordinate amounts of money on building elaborate obstacle courses that have nothing to do with their core products? Yes, but remember all that money and more would just be going to CEO bonuses and stock buybacks for investors at a normal large company, building obstacle courses is comparatively a much more efficient and equitable way to allocate profits (not to mention there is a much smaller carbon footprint to building obstacle courses vs. yachts).
Well there are elevators but they purposefully aren’t turned on until 10:30am after the morning upper management selection process has concluded for the day.
gamerant.com
Gorące