The thing is that this guy is not the head of a public company where shareholders demand massive and continually growing profits. So he acts in the interests of the consumer, the customer, the gamer. But if this was a public company, shareholders would buy shares and then demand he do something to grow that share price, so they can sell the shares later for profit.

When that happens we see that CEOs do everything they can to maximize profits, like promising release dates in earnings calls.

The difference between private and public companies is the single biggest threat to us all because as soon as the company acts in the exclusive interest of profit, everything else gets fucked. And most do.

That means employees, customers, everyone. Only the 1% benefit from the gutting of everyone else.

[–] test113 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I agree — some gamers do not understand that the gaming industry is grown up now, or at least old enough to play in the big boy money league. And the big boys are not in the business to make games; they are in gaming to make business. Inherently different decision-making process.

Also, before someone buys something, someone has to sell out. So why do we always have a problem with the buyers, aka investors, whose intentions are clear but not the sellers?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Indeed, the game devs aren't "In it for the art" anymore, they aren't John Romero and John Carmack making Doom "Because it's cool" or Wolfenstein 3D "because I liked that Castle Wolfenstein game on the ZX Spectrum or whatever"

It's Cigar Munching old men who don't know what a Mario is, and don't care, they just know that the chart goes up when they release a product with a trending name, regardless of content.

[–] ripcord 1 points 10 months ago

I mean, the Doom guys were also doing it for the money, at least as a big motovator. But it was less profit-drivem, way more small and less corporate, with way less money on the line.

load more comments (15 replies)