• rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Let’s also not conflate “developers” with “companies”

    Development companies, like 4A Games are what people are complaining about when they complain about “Developers.” This is different from the programmers or individual game developers who work on the game as people. The words might be conflated, but the company is what’s being complained about.

    Also, it depends on the game. Metro Exodus was subject to what their publisher wanted to do. The developers behind Phoenix Point, however, received additional funding from Epic to finish their game in exchange for a year of exclusivity. It just depends. Regardless, it kinda just…doesn’t matter, right? I mean, it’s video games. There are people in the United States who can’t afford insulin. A video game being exclusively published for a year via the EGS is, like…the least of our societal problems. And I meant that literally.

    • Tak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think it does matter as I will always encourage a developer to take the money, they gotta get by and I get that but a publisher isn’t going to share that Epic money with the workers.

        • Tak@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’ve heard only good things about how Valve treats their employees. Meanwhile Ubisoft who was one of the biggest to go for Epic’s store just had 120 something layoffs.

          • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            That’s not really what we were talking about, though. And, to get back on topic, Valve doesn’t engage in profit sharing with its workers. You can like a company as much as you want. It’s still a company and at its foundation it extracts surplus value from its workers. It exists purely to make money. Like any other company. Any positive sentiment towards it that is not purely an evaluation of the quality of its products and services is misguided and largely a product of public relations, rather than any genuine merit of the entity itself.

            • Tak@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I would rather the money go to a company that treats employees better regardless if I can have what I ultimately desire.

              The point remains Epic lies saying they “help devs” Valve never claims anything.

              • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                I would rather the money go to a company that treats employees better

                Oh, okay, so you mean the company that this guy is talking about where everything was structured like high school cliques?

                Or maybe the one in which this transgender employee was referred to by their manager as “it”?

                Or maybe you mean the company this former dev talks about where your work space is basically structured so that management can watch your every action at all times?

                The point remains Epic lies saying they “help devs” Valve never claims anything.

                I mean, it’s factually true that they offer the game makers and their associated publishers a much better split than what Valve does. Valve takes 30% off of all purchases. Epic takes 12. Some companies actually get 100% of all profits the first 6 months. You can’t say Valve offers more. They might have a better storefront and more users, sure, but those aren’t merits of the company itself. It’s just merits of a monopoly.

                And Valve has always tried to claim that it was “part of the community, rather than standing above it.” Which is, of course, bullshit. They’re not part of any community. They’re a storefront. Their entire purpose is to make money off of other people’s labor.

                Come on, man, be better than “omg good guy Valve!” It’s as shitty a company as any. Don’t get suckered into thinking anything else.

                • Tak@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  “Let’s also not conflate “developers” with “companies” Epic will talk about paying developers a better cut but often times it is the publisher not the developer that gets paid.”

                  You’re doing it again. I don’t know why I got caught up in this whataboutism with you when I made myself clear from the start and you agree. It’s like you want me to argue for Valve when I don’t care. GoG is best storefront for the end user and it’s not even close.

                  • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    You do understand when it says “developers” it’s not talking about individual, human developers that sit at a computer and code levels, and instead means “game development companies,” right? Also, it’s not a “whataboutism” - it’s a direct refutation of your argument. Your argument was specifically about Valve being a “good company.” I provided evidence that it’s not a good company. That’s not a whataboutism. A whatabousim would be somebody criticizing Valve and someone else saying “well, what about Epic?!”