this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
103 points (83.2% liked)

Games

16500 readers
411 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I listen to Jeff Grubb's daily news podcast, and when some toxicity came up around Ubisoft recently, he mentioned that maybe not everyone feels that way, but they don't have anyone who feels so positively about Ubisoft that they're about to jump to their defense either, and I think that tracks. Me, personally: Is it worth openly hating and spewing vitriol at Ubisoft? No. Do I hope they fail? Yes. Do I realize how many people would be out of a job as a result? Yes. Do I feel good about that? No. Do I want products that I perceive as "bad" to succeed in the market? No. Similarly, it sucks that the talented folks at Crystal Dynamics were set to work on Avengers and that the talented folks at Rocksteady were put to work on Suicide Squad, but I'm proud of the market for not supporting that garbage, and there are positive consequences to that that affect what gets made in the future.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I agree with most of it except for what you think the punishment should be for making bad games. Why do they need to go out of business? Why can't they lose a ton of money on multiple games in a row, and then restructure and change the company dynamic? Is it just a disbelief its possible? Perhaps they will never earn your trust back no matter what?

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They spent all their time and money putting their eggs in so few baskets that I doubt they could survive even a handful of flops. If they survived long enough to pivot, that would be a-okay by me, but I doubt that timeline exists.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Interesting, I don't know I have considered they might go out of business in a matter of months. Their stock has tanked pretty bad already.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

That's their opportunity to go private for cheap. But if they do, I doubt that results in them realizing what they've done wrong.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Going private means buying back all the stock?

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If you're a public company and want to go private, you have to offer a buyback price for the outstanding shares, yes. It's easier to do when the stock is low. Or you can blow a fortune on it like Musk buying Twitter.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What do you think the reaction would be to going private? I know some well regarded studios are private, so I'm not sure what would be the issue there?

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Private companies are just as capable of making bad decisions as public ones. You just hear about them less due to scale. The same people will still be in charge at Ubisoft if this happens, and they're used to making money a certain way. This move would just be to prevent someone else from taking over the company.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

Thats fair, its more a way to hide from the public so they can continue making unpopular choices.

I still am hopeful they will realign with what their customers actually want. Its good to know the signs things are going wrong though so I appreciate that.