On November 23 2021 08:47 WombaT wrote: Not even remotely touching that stuff, which isn’t to say I underplay it’s importance, but in any business acquiring a brand, at huge expense that has an incredible reputation, a 20 year backlog of consistent quality and well, you do nothing positive with that new acquisition except tank its reputation, maybe you’re not all that great?
Blizzard is only a small part of ATVI. Since 2005, ATVI is doing very well.
If Kotick is total garbage with zero positive attributes why would the smart people at the top of Blizzard agree to form ATVI? Prolly because they thought Kotick could make them all giant piles of cash while simultaneously making great games. I don't think guys like Adham, Morhaime and Pierce were in it only for the cash. I think they loved making great games. They felt Kotick and Activision were the way to go. Who am I to question their decisions? They had a great, long run.
On November 23 2021 07:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote: O'Neal was making less than Ybarra? LOL. Richard Hoeg covers this topic is a very academic, middle of the road manner. He calls Activision-Blizzard the "dumbest company in the world" for paying O'Neal less than Ybarra. When you get comical hyperbole out of Hoeg .... you are doing something.
this is so dumb it is hard to believe it is real.
It is clear each successive Blizzard leader is making way less than their predecessor. Morhaime as CEO made a King's ransom. JAB as "president" prolly made a lot, but a fraction of what Morhaime made. The new twin heads were "co-leaders". WTF does a "co-leader" make? Prolly a tiny fraction of what Morhaime makes.
We've gone from an all powerful CEO/Founder to a Prez to twin "co-leaders". WTF? Blizzard is burning to the ground. Originally , the founders of Silicon and Synapse along with their first employees revelled in their culture of chaos. They named their company "Chaos" for a short time. Welp, its 30 years later and we've got a some chaos boys.
That’s, legitimately your take?
yes, what has Blizzard made in the past 5 years? Compare that to what Blizz made in any other 5 year time period. All the top talent is gone.
I mean, your boy Bobby openly said he wanted to take all the fun out of making games. He threw in some sexual harassment, death threats, and gross negligence of his duties as an executive for good measure, but he got the job done.
On November 23 2021 08:47 WombaT wrote: Your posting simultaneously argues that Bobby Kotick deserves his generous remuneration package because he’s a genius,
Kotick is a marketing and promotional genius. So is Don King. Many people I know have paid hundreds of dollars to watch Don King promoted fights fully knowing he murdered two people. Should we all stop watching Mike Tyson fights because he is a convicted rapist who was promoted by a convicted murderer? What can I say... I like watching Mike Tyson fights.
One can be a genius in one area and despicable in another. Like hundreds of millions of people.. I just want to watch a good fight.
Kotick acquired Mediagenic in 1991. It was worth almost nothing. It had no video game development pipeline of any kind. Therefore, Kotick deserves credit for building that company from nothing into Activision.
Since 1991 Kotick has pulled off some great moves. However, paying O'Neal less than Ybarra was a monster fuck up. Even the best make really bad mistakes. It is a mistake so bad and so obvious I wonder if he is doing this to provide cover for his buddy Brian Kelly. Kotick wants to be seen as the villian. I might be a calculated move.
If Kotick were anything less than a genius this wouldn't even be a topic because Mediagenic would've gone under.
On November 23 2021 12:52 NewSunshine wrote: I mean, your boy Bobby openly said he wanted to take all the fun out of making games.
Again, Kotick wants to be seen as the villian. Look at his part in "Moneyball". His public image is carefully calculated. This makes Kotick the lightning rod while his friends can go along undetected.
Also, taking the fun out of video games lines up with the old adage "don't mix business with pleasure". It is a signal to investors that Kotick is all business all the time.
Ironically, if Kotick truly did take the fun out of making games the guys at Blizzard wouldn't have been getting drunk and doing cube crawls at work in the middle of the week. Assuming that , in fact, that did happen.
Anyone that has spent any time in the gaming industry knows what a prick Kotick is. The industry as a whole is very incestual. People that have repeatedly sunk companies into the dirt get hired elsewhere by their buddies...only to repeat it. It is commonplace. Thinking he is a genius is ludicrous. The only thing he has really been good at is shenaniganning his way to the top. Please enlighten us on what exactly he has done that has actually been good for the industry, his employees, or the companies he has worked for.
Thinking Bobby Kotick is the kind of thinking that says someone is successful exclusively because of their own efforts, which is definitely only a small sliver that dictates how people become successful in this world. Bobby Kotick got hard carried by a ton of passionate game developers being exploited and wrung dry and he let them be molested and raped while they carried Activision to success.
On November 23 2021 08:47 WombaT wrote: Not even remotely touching that stuff, which isn’t to say I underplay it’s importance, but in any business acquiring a brand, at huge expense that has an incredible reputation, a 20 year backlog of consistent quality and well, you do nothing positive with that new acquisition except tank its reputation, maybe you’re not all that great?
Blizzard is only a small part of ATVI. Since 2005, ATVI is doing very well.
If Kotick is total garbage with zero positive attributes why would the smart people at the top of Blizzard agree to form ATVI? Prolly because they thought Kotick could make them all giant piles of cash while simultaneously making great games. I don't think guys like Adham, Morhaime and Pierce were in it only for the cash. I think they loved making great games. They felt Kotick and Activision were the way to go. Who am I to question their decisions? They had a great, long run.
On November 23 2021 07:18 JimmyJRaynor wrote: O'Neal was making less than Ybarra? LOL. Richard Hoeg covers this topic is a very academic, middle of the road manner. He calls Activision-Blizzard the "dumbest company in the world" for paying O'Neal less than Ybarra. When you get comical hyperbole out of Hoeg .... you are doing something.
It is clear each successive Blizzard leader is making way less than their predecessor. Morhaime as CEO made a King's ransom. JAB as "president" prolly made a lot, but a fraction of what Morhaime made. The new twin heads were "co-leaders". WTF does a "co-leader" make? Prolly a tiny fraction of what Morhaime makes.
We've gone from an all powerful CEO/Founder to a Prez to twin "co-leaders". WTF? Blizzard is burning to the ground. Originally , the founders of Silicon and Synapse along with their first employees revelled in their culture of chaos. They named their company "Chaos" for a short time. Welp, its 30 years later and we've got a some chaos boys.
That’s, legitimately your take?
yes, what has Blizzard made in the past 5 years? Compare that to what Blizz made in any other 5 year time period. All the top talent is gone.
I mean, your boy Bobby openly said he wanted to take all the fun out of making games. He threw in some sexual harassment, death threats, and gross negligence of his duties as an executive for good measure, but he got the job done.
On November 23 2021 08:47 WombaT wrote: Your posting simultaneously argues that Bobby Kotick deserves his generous remuneration package because he’s a genius,
Kotick is a marketing and promotional genius. So is Don King. Many people I know have paid hundreds of dollars to watch Don King promoted fights fully knowing he murdered two people. Should we all stop watching Mike Tyson fights because he is a convicted rapist who was promoted by a convicted murderer? What can I say... I like watching Mike Tyson fights.
One can be a genius in one area and despicable in another. Like hundreds of millions of people.. I just want to watch a good fight.
Kotick acquired Mediagenic in 1991. It was worth almost nothing. It had no video game development pipeline of any kind. Therefore, Kotick deserves credit for building that company from nothing into Activision.
Since 1991 Kotick has pulled off some great moves. However, paying O'Neal less than Ybarra was a monster fuck up. Even the best make really bad mistakes. It is a mistake so bad and so obvious I wonder if he is doing this to provide cover for his buddy Brian Kelly. Kotick wants to be seen as the villian. I might be a calculated move.
If Kotick were anything less than a genius this wouldn't even be a topic because Mediagenic would've gone under.
On November 23 2021 12:52 NewSunshine wrote: I mean, your boy Bobby openly said he wanted to take all the fun out of making games.
Again, Kotick wants to be seen as the villian. Look at his part in "Moneyball". His public image is carefully calculated. This makes Kotick the lightning rod while his friends can go along undetected.
Also, taking the fun out of video games lines up with the old adage "don't mix business with pleasure". It is a signal to investors that Kotick is all business all the time.
Ironically, if Kotick truly did take the fun out of making games the guys at Blizzard wouldn't have been getting drunk and doing cube crawls at work in the middle of the week. Assuming that , in fact, that did happen.
Most of the available evidence points out to Kotick behaving like a prick because he’s, just maybe a total prick.
He’s not some WWE wrestler where the promotion needs some people to play heel, we’re almost hitting ‘that wasn’t the thing it obviously is, he’s playing 4D chess’ territory.
If he wanted to take the heat off others, sure I could see that but his actions speak to entirely the opposite. If you wanted to do that, and I can see the utility in doing so, you don’t do things like writing extremely unpopular internal emails and stick someone else’s name on it.
Whether, ultimately those that pull the strings decide this is relevant or not is another thing, but that remains to be seen. He seems the type where the company’s successes are his, and the failures are someone else’s, so he’ll probably skate through as usual.
He’s certainly had many successes under his belt over the years, many he absolutely can take the credit for, just as Don King used to deliver great boxing bills.
Unlike King, Kotick is the head honcho on a big slew of charges and accusations atop a huge company, that he not only is accused of failing to reign in, but increasingly that he was partaking in such behaviour himself, with colleagues so I mean, it’s not really a case of him merely being a bad guy, but him directly bringing that into his job, or should I make it clear those are the accusations being made.
On November 24 2021 01:24 WombaT wrote: Unlike King, Kotick is the head honcho on a big slew of charges and accusations atop a huge company, that he not only is accused of failing to reign in, but increasingly that he was partaking in such behaviour himself, with colleagues so I mean, it’s not really a case of him merely being a bad guy, but him directly bringing that into his job, or should I make it clear those are the accusations being made.
Most claims are merely accusations. However, Kotick admits he either threatened to have someone killed or threatened to kill them directly. I'm uncertain EXACTLY how the death threat was phrased. Kotick admits he did it. The guy prolly has got more than 1 skeleton in his closet.
Not paying O'Neal the same as Ybarra seems like some kind of bizarre, intentional F.U. Ybarra and O'Neal requested the same pay. These actions make Kotick appear to be crazy.. I propose that he is not crazy at all. He is "crazy like a fox."
I think Kotick may be providing cover for Brian Kelly. Kotick soaks up all the headlines while Brian Kelly is away from the spotlight. I think if any one digs deep into Brian Kelly's financial gymnastics they'll find some bad stuff in his past and present. Brian Kelly has been with Activision since 1991. Kotick and Kelly must be lifelong friends. Activision was a handful of employees plus a fax machine in 1991.
Brian Kelly knows how to shuffle money between charities and private companies... you know .. to lower his tax bill. The media worries about whether or not Kotick touched a female employee's leg ten years ago while Brian Kelly funnels hundreds of millions or billions into his various charities in order to drastically lower his tax bill.
Not that there isn’t some sensationalism injected, especially on Twitter
Methinks people care rather less about some isolated incident of alleged impropriety than the boss presiding over a toxic work culture, and not reigning it in. Especially now said individual admitted threatening a woman.
In isolation, most of us have probably said some awful things while heated, but as part of an alleged pattern of company-wide impropriety, accusations it wasn’t taken seriously as a problem, add to that Kotick being accused of similar things and links start to form.
I can’t look inside the souls of people and ascertain motive, my reading of them paying Jen O’Neal less was they don’t take the concerns at all seriously, made a token appointment and to boot paid her less as a fuck you. The other is gross incompetence at image control, if nout else I don’t think these upper echelons are grossly incompetent.
The likes of Kotick want their employees to shut up and fuck off, and for this issue to go away.
As for Brian Kelly, that’s standard rich guy stuff. Do I like it? No If he’s actually gone beyond accounting wizardry into realms of impropriety, that’s certainly a story I would be interested in reading if anyone does the investigatory hard yards
IMO, Hoeg's analysis is spot on. Even if we assume 95% of the accusations are false and that the EEOC settlement is fair and reasonable.... the ATVI board is fucking Activision into the ground. Months to produce a press release filled with run-on sentences worse than mine. LOL.
On November 24 2021 01:24 WombaT wrote: He’s not some WWE wrestler where the promotion needs some people to play heel, we’re almost hitting ‘that wasn’t the thing it obviously is, he’s playing 4D chess’ territory.
At first blush your perspective seems 100% reasonable. However, as bizarre as it is Kotick is building up his Vince Mcmahon "evil promoter " image. It is a carefully crafted image built over many years. Here is just one example of building his image as the "evil promoter".
This is Bobby Kotick cutting costs and asking his general manager to do miracles with very little resources. He wants that image of himself out there in the public eye. In this story the baseball team had the best regular season record in the entire 28 team league... with Bobby Kotick cutting costs to the bone.
State treasurers from California, Massachusetts, Illinois, Oregon, Delaware, and Nevada are calling on Activision Blizzard to take more serious measures in addressing ongoing high-profile investigations and lawsuits about the company’s troubling culture. According to Axios, said treasurers have asked to meet with the board members at Activision Blizzard by December 20, threatening action against the company if it does not comply.
A quick recap: Activision Blizzard have been accused of fostering a “frat boy” work culture where women across multiple studios were sexually harassed, assaulted, and psychologically traumatized. A more recent Wall Street Journal investigation also unearthed that company CEO Bobby Kotick knew about the sexual misconduct allegations over the years, often downplaying them or actively participating in the misconduct. While the state of California was already involved in these Activision Blizzard proceedings, and a number of entities are calling for Kotick’s resignation, now more government figures are joining the chorus.
State treasurers, for those who don’t know, are in charge of overseeing financial matters that concern both its state and citizens. Treasurers in states like Illinois, for example, serve as auditors of public accounts. But why would a state treasurer care about what a video game company is doing? Well, some states have active investments in Activision Blizzard that are affected by the company’s stock prices—which in turn affects pension funds that people use in retirement. But having investments in Activision Blizzard also means these government shareholders have some power in dictating what the company does next. And right now, the treasurers aren’t happy with Activision Blizzard’s leadership.
“We’re concerned that the current CEO and board directors don’t have the skillset, nor the conviction to institute these sweeping changes needed to transform their culture, to restore trust with employees and shareholders and their partners,” Illinois state treasurer Michael Frerichs told Axios.
While Kotick has reportedly proposed that he would consider quitting his position as the CEO if he can’t fix the company’s culture, and Activision Blizzard has formed a Workplace Responsibility Committee “ to improve workplace culture and eliminate all forms of harassment and discrimination at the Company,” Frerichs told Axios that “there needs to be sweeping changes made in the company.”
“One thing the Treasurers bring is also a bit of a spotlight here and a little public pressure as well,” Frerichs told Axios, who also noted he was troubled by the news of unequal pay at the company. “So it’s not all just about the number of dollars and number of shares that we have.”
The Massachusetts state treasurer Deborah Goldberg shared similar concerns with Frerichs and was baffled that the Activision Blizzard board members stood by Kotick following demands for his resignation. Goldberg told Axios that Activision Blizzard’s case calls for “a true investigation” from “an outside investigator.” Even a proposed $18M settlement to the victims of harassment at Activision Blizzard doesn’t seem to be doing much in convincing people that the company is committed to deeper changes to the overall company culture.
“You can point to, ‘Hey, we paid the victims, we’re making them whole’,” Frerichs said, “But if you’re continuing a culture that creates new victims in the future, you are creating more risk for your company,” he said.
Pressure has been mounting on Activision Blizzard to address their work policy both outside and within the gaming industry. Head of Xbox Phil Spencer, PlayStation boss Jim Ryan, and Nintendo president Doug Bowser sent an email to their staff criticizing Activision Blizzard’s company culture. The National Legal and Policy Center also called upon Coca-Cola Chairman and CEO James Quincey to “immediately seek the resignation” of Kotick, who currently serves as a member of its board of directors.
While emails addressed to staff members at Xbox, Nintendo, and PlayStation lambasting Activision Blizzard are all well and good, at the end of the day they are not public stances that take Activision to task for their toxic work culture. It’s been an open secret that Activision Blizzard has had toxic leadership well beyond anything currently being litigated, so it feels long overdue that people with power are also taking a stance. Although it is new for treasurers to lean in on a gaming company, there’s precedent. In the past, treasurers have used funding like a carrot on a stick to influence operational changes in companies—like divesting Massachusetts’ pension to address climate change, according to Axios.
Public pressure that affects the bottom line on Activision Blizzard while also threatening structural change speaks truth to power better than an email can. Welcome to the resistance, state treasurers.
Workers engaged in creating software are not auto workers assembly a car on a factory line. Sacrificing a few years of your short career as a software craftsman or craftswoman for some miniscule chance some kind of proto-union forms is a fool's gambit.
if you do not like your job situation at a place that makes software... your best move is to leave and get a different job. Trying to start a union is a waste of time. The guys at the very top know this... and they know the best way to buttress the wave of anger is to get a bunch of angry people to fail at making a union. This way they start infighting. Once the peons start fighting the guys at the top win.
One of the big leaders of ABK just left Activision. Folks, its already over.
At this point .. I'd say that, for all intents and purposes , Jason Schreier is leading the "controlled opposition" against ATVI. Folks, its already over.
Sony and Microsoft also has sexual abuse skeletons in their collective closets. Here is a look at the skeletons of M$ and Sony. This is why Sony and M$ will never really stand up to ATVI. They have their own internal issues.
People are workers, no matter whether they work with their hands in accordance with a construction manual or with their hands typing code into programmes to make games.
there's no reason why they shouldn't profit from forming a union.
On December 07 2021 20:08 Zambrah wrote: People wouldnt have such "short careers" in game dev if they unionized and didn't get overworked, burnt out, and/or laid off en masse.
i cant say for certain but im pretty sure youre missing his point. unions dont do shit as far as solving the "short careers" of game developers. game developers are in the same boat as pretty much every other software developer/engineer etc.; where their skillset becomes quickly obsolete because the market moves faster than they can relearn their trade. by the time youve got 10 years of experience under your belt and you should theoretically be paid a handsome amount, youre fighting to keep your contract and competing against a new generation of 20 year olds that are able to do what you do already but better because they can do newer shit too
Yeah that's not how it works, you're never going to have a newly formed employee that can manage big projects without fucking up, or that knows the inside out of a codebase. Managing 2-3 coders is already a nightmare, i don't even want to think about a team of newbies being led by another recent graduate You make it sounds like experience wasn't worth anything in this field and thats horribly wrong. Also a dev should be like a doctor, always learning new stuff.
The whole point of a union is to present a (relatively) united front for grievances rather than be picked off raising them as an individual or in small groups.
If unions lead to infighting and dissipation of anger away from the head honchos, surely they’d be in favour and pushing for unionisation rather than very much the opposite.
On December 07 2021 21:08 Erasme wrote: Yeah that's not how it works, you're never going to have a newly formed employee that can manage big projects without fucking up, or that knows the inside out of a codebase. Managing 2-3 coders is already a nightmare, i don't even want to think about a team of newbies being led by another recent graduate You make it sounds like experience wasn't worth anything in this field and thats horribly wrong. Also a dev should be like a doctor, always learning new stuff.
yeah lets take 100 graduates. a decent amount of them stay in the field after 10 years or so, the rest will move on to other things. of those that stay in the field, how many do you think actually take on managerial roles? if you think all of them get managerial roles then youre living in fantasy land. the fact is the IT industry actually forces employees to take on managerial roles (ie. reduced or nil amounts of coding and more work related to people) more than typical workplaces. if you try and remain a coder, youre racing against the clock. this is unlike other typical white collar jobs (eg accountants/lawyers) where you could be doing pretty much the same job you were doing 20 years ago and you wouldnt be anywhere near at as much risk as workers in the software industry are. i mean its not even just software employees that experience this. to a lesser extent, architects and engineers also have a similar issue, it just doesnt endanger their livelihood as much.
EPT
