Ah yes, Saudia Arabia is the gonna ruin games with racist tropes… Like any call of duty game or most western games set in the Middle East or anywhere in the world really making with racist tropes and stereotypes. Mate whether your from the UK or America the call is coming from inside the house with your awful fucking nations and their bullshit notion of “freedom of expression” remind me who was it that was crying about battlefield v having women and black people in it?
Who said it was better before. The problem is that every nation is pushing their agenda and we need truly independent games companies. Having video games owned by public funds is just bad. Like every medias owned for political reasons.
I’m not from UK or America. My country got stereotyped enough in games and medias don’t worry.
On one hand this is big news, on the other hand, I don’t really see how this matters.
The last EA game that I bought was SimCity (2013) and that was comically bad. Just my experience, but it’s not like fans of their sports games will be looking for alternatives (irrespective of what EA does).
The Saudi part matters a lot, as they’ve been grabbing lots of the gaming industry in their diversification efforts.
It also moves what their incentives and goals are. They’ll still try to make money, which means Ultimate Team isn’t going away without legislation, but when they’re private, they can probably afford to burn through some war chest searching for new franchises to replace their defunct franchises, and perhaps public investors wouldn’t be interested in losing that money in the short term.
I don’t really see why public or private status matters in the picture. It will be still be the same culture (and leadership?). They try something new, but if will still be the same old IMO.
I could be wrong though, I don’t really have much interests in AAA outside of a few exceptions.
Truthfully, you’ll likely see very little change in the next few years, but they wouldn’t do it if they didn’t see an advantage to it. The article outlines some of them.
Being publicly traded means you don’t follow any sort of ethics, mission statement, or even actual business metrics anymore, you chase incredibly toxic and self destructive short term profit over all else. Being private means they might be and to recover from their bullshit, especially since a death spiral for a corpo is centuries long apparently.
What are the odds this would let them make better games?
Is it worse to be owned by vultures? Or to be a publicly traded company that’s legally compelled to maximize short term profit at the expense of long term viability?
Every company starts out privately owned. Being publically owned means you are legally required to put shareholders’ interests first and thus essentially be purely profit and growth driven, leanding to an unsustainable cycle of infinite growth which is a major cause of the enshitification of everything as we know it today.
Private companies can at least set their own goals and do things other than chase profit. Typically, that’s either “chase profit so the owners can cash out” or “focus on providing an actually good service/product so that profit/growth will follow”.
Private Equity is probably what you’re thinking about, where a PE firm purchases a company that’s either already private or they make it private again. There are many PE firms with many different management styles and goals, but the overwhelming majority have a goal of squeezing every last penny out of a company using any means necessary and fucking over the employees as much as possible before divesting it and moving to the next one.
If EA weren’t already so bloated and full of suits, I might imagine this would allow them to pump the brakes on their scummy moneymaking policies like the other publicly traded corps.
Przyczyna jest już znana: jest nią brak inercji odnawialnych źródeł energii. W tych krajach jest za dużo wiatraków i solarów, a za mało prawdziwych elektrowni. Rozsynchronizowała im się sieć przesyłowa i walnęło.
Prawdopodobną przyczyną była zbyt duża generacja z OZE w momencie gdy przerwany został eksport prądu do Francji. Ciekawe czy da to do myślenia hiszpańskim socjalistom, którzy planują energiewende na wzór niemiecki.
„Przede wszystkim Polska stoi dziś przed wyzwaniem związanym ze starzejącą się siecią energetyczną, a zwłaszcza z przestarzałą siecią przesyłową. To właśnie ona stanowi główną barierę dla szybkiego rozwoju zielonej energii i integracji nowych źródeł prosumenckich” – znów Magdalena Dziewguć. „Kluczowe jest więc wdrożenie warstwy danych i inteligentnego zarządzania, które pozwoli na bieżąco monitorować stan sieci i optymalizować jej działanie”.
To brzmi wręcz komicznie – rozwiązaniem na problem starzejącej się sieci przesyłowej nie jest jej rozbudowa, tylko… uruchomienie niezwykle energożernych usług po to, by tę sieć „zoptymalizować”?
Gdy ma się do dyspozycji tylko młotek, każdy problem wygląda jak gwóźdź – brzmi angielskie przysłowie. Google ma do pompowania bajerę AI, więc każdy problem musi mieć rozwiązanie w postaci AI.
„Dla Google’a to nie jest nowość. W ramach globalnej infrastruktury stworzyliśmy własną, zaawansowaną sieć energetyczną, dzięki której nasze usługi, takie jak YouTube, wyszukiwarka czy Mapy Google, są dostępne dla miliardów użytkowników na całym świecie bez zakłóceń” – kontynuuje swoją wypowiedź szefowa Google Cloud Polska. Niecałe pół roku po tym, gdy usługi Google Cloud doświadczyły poważnych zakłóceń w Europie.
That was a shitty website. I don’t even remember why I clicked the link. The page jump around while you scroll down. I thought I was at the bottom PF the page at least 3 time.
reuters.com
Gorące