Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Blizzard employees crying and hugging in the parking lot

123457

Comments

  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    edited February 2019
    laserit said:
    laserit said:
    It's a cost of doing business not a revenue generator.
    True, it is a cost of doing business, but it is tied to revenue in the fact that it keeps things organized, and you don't have to waste revenue-generating employees' time. It is support staff, Extremely important but unseen background that facilitates everything we see. I'd say it is a cost of generating revenue :)

    Now, non support staff that don't generate revenue is sort of like a football player that sucks.

    The support staff are the trainers, doctors, IT guys that handle the computer tech, people that wash the uniforms etc, they are support, they are important due to opportunity cost. 

    The revenue generating employee or in a football player's case, a wining-generator who doesn't help should be let go. 

    So going back to blizzard, those eSports/Publishers are not support staff, they are like a football player that sucks. Get rid of that person :)
    laserit
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    edited February 2019
    lahnmir said:
    On the other hand, when a ship is sinking the captain makes sure everybody is safe before getting of the ship himself  ;) 

    /Cheers,
    Lahnmir





    Not all of them . . . 

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/11/concordia-captain-jumped-off-ship_n_4253884.html

    "He slipped and fell into a life boat" :)
    MadFrenchie
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • TimEisenTimEisen ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,293
    TIL When the top few percent have convinced the masses to defend that which they will never be, they've earned their Plutocratic Kleptocracy. 
    MadFrenchieGdemamiUngoodIselin
    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
  • LeFantomeLeFantome Member RarePosts: 603
    Do you have any objective measure whatsoever to prove what percentage of profit change is directly attributable to the CEO position alone?

    Any at all?  Anything that guarantees or leads to an even reasonable assurance that, had they hired another CEO (all other factors being identical), it would've led to a massive amount of lost profit potential?  And, incidentally, if you do, can you provide further evidence that there wasn't an even better option they could've taken?

    Do you have insider knowledge of how hands-on that CEO was with every key decision that may have contributed?  Whether he shook things up in each department, or largely kept them intact?  Something you can show us?

    Of course not.
    - You never know if you'd do better with another CEO or something else unless you had a parallel universe. 
    - Time will tell if they made the right decision. Whether they are right or wrong, is not the reason they get paid so much, it is their potential that they are getting paid for. That potential goes in both directions. Either ton of profit or mega tank or anything in between. 

    But the CEO's has the final decision on the direction of the company. They are the chief executive. They have the final say in everything. They will decide if the company goes mobile and how much they go in that direction. They make the most meaningful decisions. They clearly have the biggest influence over revenue. 

    They are essentially the captain of a ship. They decide where the ship goes. Isn't that the most important person on the whole ship?

    Put it this way, as an analogy, the most important decision for the highest ranking person in the military is the person/people who decides whether they go to war or not.  Platoon leader, general, colonel, grunt, supply staff, military cook, their job is important but not even close to the most important. 

    In the military the pay gap isn't that high because the success of military is based on something other than money. But in business, success = money, you want money, pay a ton to the person who has the most influence. 


    Pls, dont take the military as analogy.  Because you're wrong. If you think that the most important decision for the highest ranking person in the military is the person/people who decides whether they go to war or not is right. Than you know nothing about military.
    Nada.

    Yes, at the end of the day, someone will take the call. But based so many people and meetings. They will have to look at, men and women available, supplies, aricrafts , tanks , ships , money  and so on. And all those things have to be ready and trained to go to war . If they're not. Your most important man, wont do anything , even if he wants to go to war.

    Plus, ask any military, they don't care about that $hit. The most important person is your buddy to your left and right. Because when your life in on the front line. Your section commander is the a important man as if he gives the wrong orders, everyone dies.
    But he they don't do anything..to defend the position ,nothing will happen and maybe the section commander will die..and the people behind him too.

    It's all about everyone doing his little things, that make things possible.
    The most important person is everyone, from the private to the president. 

    Saying that one person is the most important than everyone else is an insult for those men and women.



    MadFrenchieGdemamiparrotpholk

    image
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 34,912
    laserit said:
    Phry said:
    TimEisen said:
    A thread about people's great loss turns into a battle between objective facts taken from the observation of reality and propaganda based on truthiness. This is the now. 
    Because people losing their jobs is depressing, more so when the company in question just said they had an extremely profitable year. If you think about it too much, it just makes you angry  :/
    Right but being profitable doesn't mean that the status quo should be kept. If I have a company that is profitable but I just realized that 2 out of 20 of my employees don't really contribute to revenue, doesn't it make sense to let them go?

    Perhaps, reassigning them is better but if their expertise doesn't cut it, then it is fine to let em go. 
    There are many jobs in a workplace that don't contribute to revenue. Janitorial staff, maintenance, HR etc.

    All part of overhead

    Some companies cut corners on these things and it can show. 
    Your posts are awesome in general laserit. I am jealous of your business too. I also thought your last post was awesome how you prefer not to outsource your work. However, I disagree with this post of yours. 

    Indirectly, janitorial staff, maintenance, and HR contribute to your business via opportunity cost

    Janitors clean stuff so regular employees don't have to spend time doing it and can focus on bringing in the money, maintenance fixes shit so the staff can do the work that brings in money, and HR handles all your employees because once you get so big you need people to do it for you and your employees bring you money. 

    They are part of the support team which is very important. 
    All just overhead or expenses which every company tries to keep down as they don't contribute directly to generating revenue.

    Blizzard is basically cutting CSRs, publicists and other overhead personnel while keeping or even increasing developers.

    The firm I work for does everything possible to reduce overhead including offshoring customer service and personnel to Manila, eliminated most secretarial staff years ago, vendor out facilities, security, grounds keeping and even computer hardware deployment and maintenance.

    For a long while they tried vending out much of the software development to offshore contractors but it didn't turn out so well.

    So last few years they greatly reduced the contract work force as well as brought back a lot of jobs here locally.

    Sounds great in theory but it should be noted more than half of the staff are fairly recent immigrants originally hailing from other countries.

    My agile team consists of:

    5 offshore employees
    4 onshore employees including the FTL are recent immigrants 
    3 onshore employees are people born in US

    Pretty standard mix firm wide, at least in tech.



    Gdemamilaserit

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,011
    Gorwe said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Why is it that the same people who dislike Amazon and big business are usually the same people who want to turn all the health care over to single payer and totally eliminate competition in that sector?

    Off topic I know, but it hurts my brain.
    I actually like competition, but the presence of Amazon and Google kinda defeats that purpose, wouldn't you say? We all benefit from competition, not so much from mono / duo polies.

    Now, if you don't mind I need to back off from these discussions. They...unnerve me. Because the more I see how Capitalism and all the resources are mangled, the more...bad I feel. I'm not the one to retreat from reality, but in this case...you understand. Such reality isn't pleasurable at all. I'll stick to my nonsense I think.
    This I can agree with Amazon and Google are Monopolies and true problems to the system.  This is why they should be broken up.   The problem is a lot of companies get way to big and end up corrupting the whole system. 

     laserit said:
    Phry said:
    TimEisen said:
    A thread about people's great loss turns into a battle between objective facts taken from the observation of reality and propaganda based on truthiness. This is the now. 
    Because people losing their jobs is depressing, more so when the company in question just said they had an extremely profitable year. If you think about it too much, it just makes you angry  :/
    Right but being profitable doesn't mean that the status quo should be kept. If I have a company that is profitable but I just realized that 2 out of 20 of my employees don't really contribute to revenue, doesn't it make sense to let them go?

    Perhaps, reassigning them is better but if their expertise doesn't cut it, then it is fine to let em go. 
    There are many jobs in a workplace that don't contribute to revenue. Janitorial staff, maintenance, HR etc.

    All part of overhead

    Some companies cut corners on these things and it can show. 
    I think what Cryomatrix is referring to that there are some employees in key roles that end up not making money and costing the company money.   For example I have worked with a Manager that talked up the business so much to launch itself into a new market.  This Manager sold the business on getting in this market and investing millions of dollars in to getting into that market, hiring people spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on IT.   In the end the Manager lost money in the market the employees got sacked and the Manager moved on to another department.    This is a person that should have been fired and the people moved to different departments because he is one of the people that didn't contribute to revenue.  
    Gdemamilaserit
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    edited February 2019
    LeFantome said:

    Pls, dont take the military as analogy.  Because you're wrong. If you think that the most important decision for the highest ranking person in the military is the person/people who decides whether they go to war or not is right. Than you know nothing about military.
    Nada.

    Yes, at the end of the day, someone will take the call. But based so many people and meetings. They will have to look at, men and women available, supplies, aricrafts , tanks , ships , money  and so on. And all those things have to be ready and trained to go to war . If they're not. Your most important man, wont do anything , even if he wants to go to war.

    Plus, ask any military, they don't care about that $hit. The most important person is your buddy to your left and right. Because when your life in on the front line. Your section commander is the a important man as if he gives the wrong orders, everyone dies.
    But he they don't do anything..to defend the position ,nothing will happen and maybe the section commander will die..and the people behind him too.

    It's all about everyone doing his little things, that make things possible.
    The most important person is everyone, from the private to the president. 

    Saying that one person is the most important than everyone else is an insult for those men and women.



    Well by important, I should rephrase, the ability to affect most lives. I talked about how important support is. It is all important, but let's rephrase important to that which affects the most lives.


    The military cook, supply manager affects lives, they need to do their job, but the person/people who affects the most lives is the one who decides whether to go to war or not.

    A platoon leader controls or influences the lives of the platoon. It is very important, but it is a small number. The person who orders the platoons has a bigger responsibility, the person who orders the battalion has a bigger responsibility, the person who orders the military or who decides to go to war has the biggest affect on people's lives. 


    For example, in WW2 Germany lost 4.3 million people in the war. Let's say if they had better equipment, better generals, better colonels, platoon leaders, they would have lost what? 4.2million, 3.5million, etc?

    How about not starting a world war in the first place. How about, not attacking Russia. You don't start a WW, you save a ton of lives. You don't fight Russia you save a ton of lives (we'll ignore the fact that Germany would have probably killed more americans/french/british and everyone else if they did that)

    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • TimEisenTimEisen ColumnistMember EpicPosts: 3,293
    edited February 2019
     This is why wealth distribution is at its worst since just before the great depression. They've convinced us that somehow them being obnoxiously excessively wealthy while we starve for health care that tries to F us when we get sick, is better for all of us. I can't...I mean, just unbelievable, truly I can't imagine. Ah but I have a .00000000000001 chance of being really wealthy someday so I better make sure the elite have free reign so when I get there, because we ALL know someday I WILL, I'll have free reign too! Its bad enough they have their own legal system with Corporate Deposition, NDA's and buying up stories of their victims but we have to make sure they are extra extra clear to keep trickling down our throats, just enough to get a taste and feel the burn, before we go off defending their right to endanger the global economy! O.O
    GdemamiMadFrenchiedelete5230
    I used to role-play a Warrior Priest now I role-play a writer.
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    TimEisen said:
    TIL When the top few percent have convinced the masses to defend that which they will never be, they've earned their Plutocratic Kleptocracy. 
    You are assuming I'm not in the top few percent. I'm defending capitalism as you get paid for what money you bring in. That's the basis of capitalism, that's why some people can be worth billions. It is a bit frustrating when people think you should get paid based on the intrinsic nature of your job and it just doesn't work that way. 

    Also, the US is plutocratic . . . but i wouldn't call it a kleptocracy, or it would be less on a scale of all other govt. 
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813



    Again, you're placing every bit of the profits the entire company made directly and fully attributable to the CEO, because you then have him "negotiate" by saying he made him 500 times his salary per year.  But what is his answer when Bezos replies with: "Are you literally asserting you, alone, created that profit?  And, if not, what is the ratio of company profit to your current salary you can prove is directly attributable to your work, and not the work of others who (in spite of any overarching direction you may have given) exercise autonomy in decision-making that affects the overall health of the company every day?"

    That "provable percentage" directly attributable to the CEO would affect that claimed ratio, would it not?  It would certainly seem to affect the validity of said ratio.

    Don't get me wrong; I never said CEOs shouldn't make more than other employees.  But you're not arguing a binary, you're arguing a matter of degree.  I would ask that you provide more causative evidence to directly support the degree you claim is necessary.  And if we're unable to do so (EDIT- by do so, I mean provide more causative evidence)...  What does that say about the strength of that argument by degree?
    Your point is valid. Not all profit is due to the CEO. 100% agree.

    You disagree with me on the degree. Not all the profit is attributable to the CEO, i just feel the majority of it is or the potential is.

    (Of course there are exceptions, a break through scientist figures out the cure for cancer and a big Pharma company now makes 400 billion a year. Obviously the scientist contributed way more.)

    Another point that haven't brought up about CEO salaries that will increase their compensation is market competition for their services. That will drive up their salaries a bit. Let's say the Blizzard CEO leaves his job of his own accord, without competition, i'm sure a company would offer him a good salary that is probably a bit above what he makes now. But with the competition, that'd go up by a certain %. 
    MadFrenchie
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • NibsNibs Member UncommonPosts: 287
    Bear in mind that in publicly traded companies CEO remunerations, and those of the rest of the board, are voted on by the shareholders. And recently there have been a number of shocking (in the business world) shareholder revolts over what have been seen as high packages for underperforming boards.

    CEOs do have a huge impact on the direction of the company. But again all the big decisions are voted on by the whole board. The CEO isn't the sole pilot of HMS Corporate. The board receives reports and forecasts up the wazzoo from the next level down, who in turn get their info from the level them. From those reports and forecasts, plus their own "expert" knowledge and experience, the board comes up with proposals. Once the board have decided on the general direction of the company (mobile or console, or PC; game as service or single player) its then up to the lower downs to deliver on that. If the board doesn't have the right people in place to execute those broad plans, or don't release enough resources, or do any one of a million other things, the best laid plans can still fail.

    No, I'm not justifying the high pay rates some of these people get. But its the shareholders that approve them. And all they're interested in is receiving nice fat dividends. As long as the board keeps delivering big dividends, the shareholders will keep approving the pay packages. And those shareholders? Yeah, that's your pension provider, that's charities, as well as private investors. its not just evil mean hedge funds...
    CryomatrixGdemami
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    TimEisen said:
     This is why wealth distribution is at its worst since just before the great depression. They've convinced us that somehow them being obnoxiously excessively wealthy while we starve for health care that tries to F us when we get sick, is better for all of us. I can't...I mean, just unbelievable, truly I can't imagine. Ah but I have a .00000000000001 chance of being really wealthy someday so I better make sure the elite have free reign so when I get there, because we ALL know someday I WILL, I'll have free reign too! Its bad enough they have their own legal system with Corporate Deposition, NDA's and buying up stories of their victims but we have to make sure they are extra extra clear to keep trickling down our throats, just enough to get a taste and feel the burn, before we go off defending their right to endanger the global economy! O.O
    I see your point. I don't like it when people buy their way out of stuff for money. The ultra wealthy have a different set of rules and can get out of shit. It isn't right. People suffer and such. 

    My main point is that I am okay with certain people having very high salaries in a capitalistic society. There are really shitty aspects of capitalism and the human element corrupts everything. 

    To give a quick example of my thought process. I think professional athletes are properly paid and in some cases underpaid. I don't agree with people screwing others and unethical crap and such. 

    I don't agree with removing regulations because I know a bunch of greedy fucks will use it to screw people. I know it happens. I'm not supporting that, just supporting the level of certain people making a ton of money by playing by the rules to get a salary. What they do with it is another issue.

    I'm okay with CEO's making a ton of money but I'm not okay with people screwing over others to make money. As a physician, I see too many other physicians (probably a minority) screwing others to make money. 
    MadFrenchie
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
  • WargfootWargfoot Member UncommonPosts: 248
    TimEisen said:
     This is why wealth distribution is at its worst since just before the great depression. 
    People say that yet I feel the average American has considerably more free time, opportunities, and overall wealth then ever before.  Many of our 'poor' have cell phones, cars, and apartments.

    I wonder if we even know what poor is anymore.

    I spent time working with a woman who was on assistance - she was poor and yet she had more food in her trailer, and could afford a phone, and 5 cats, and a truck.  She'd be the richest person for a hundred square miles in many countries today.
    CryomatrixGdemami
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 2,936
    TimEisen said:
    TIL When the top few percent have convinced the masses to defend that which they will never be, they've earned their Plutocratic Kleptocracy. 
    Wow .. perfectly said.
    GdemamiTimEisen
  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 12,437
    edited February 2019
    Wargfoot said:
    TimEisen said:
     This is why wealth distribution is at its worst since just before the great depression. 
    People say that yet I feel the average American has considerably more free time, opportunities, and overall wealth then ever before.  Many of our 'poor' have cell phones, cars, and apartments.

    I wonder if we even know what poor is anymore.

    I spent time working with a woman who was on assistance - she was poor and yet she had more food in her trailer, and could afford a phone, and 5 cats, and a truck.  She'd be the richest person for a hundred square miles in many countries today.
    Indeed, more wealth does not mean more poverty and having more wealth in a smaller percentage of population does not mean poverty is increasing. When you think about what being poor meant even fifty years ago compared to today there is no comparison and the safety net is on an unprecedented scale to what it was.

    Low income is what we are talking about, not poverty. Is there an issue with more wealth being held in such a small percentile? Possibly, it does tend to be unbalancing and raises issues about what a person can do with their wealth. But some seem to disagree with this on principle, for me point to where they have an unfair advantage and address that. Scholarships for the bright who cannot afford to go to university and so on.

    Could they pay more in tax? Yes, but there is a limit and in this country the lowest paid don't even pay tax. I prefer benefits for those on low income rather than punishing the rich which just seems like jealousy so much of the time.
    MadFrenchieCryomatrixWargfoot

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • iixviiiixiixviiiix Member RarePosts: 2,061
    I hope the laid off don't cause any problem for W3 Reforge . Ready look follow for the release of it .
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    The basis of capitalism and what these entitled, scale rigging, cheating c#%ts do with capitalism are 2 different things. That's the problem

    Watching some of you nutmegs go on about poverty and wealth like these persons don't use their pocket change to nefariously swing the balance of capitalism/wealth distribution is cute yet typical though.

    There isn't even much point in bringing up inflation and how cost of living goes up, for the same people who can't get raises or any hikes in baseline wage. "They got cell phones tho hurr durr"

    We just watched a game company get a nice increase in profits and promptly sh!# can 8% of their workforce.

    Where the f#$% are all the patriots who all are about returning to "greatness"? Are they talking about when a person could work in a factory and live a nice middle class life? HA!

    Gdemami
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited February 2019
    The basis of capitalism and what these entitled, scale rigging, cheating c#%ts do with capitalism are 2 different things. That's the problem

    Watching some of you nutmegs go on about poverty and wealth like these persons don't use their pocket change to nefariously swing the balance of capitalism/wealth distribution is cute yet typical though.

    There isn't even much point in bringing up inflation and how cost of living goes up, for the same people who can't get raises or any hikes in baseline wage. "They got cell phones tho hurr durr"

    We just watched a game company get a nice increase in profits and promptly sh!# can 8% of their workforce.

    Where the f#$% are all the patriots who all are about returning to "greatness"? Are they talking about when a person could work in a factory and live a nice middle class life? HA!

    A return to that greatness would require we not grab pitchforks and torches to defend the ultra-rich when that 70% marginal tax rate on the highest bracket is mentioned (that being the same high-end rate America maintained during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, only being reduced to around 50% in the 80s).  Oddly enough: guess when income inequality in America started spiraling out of control?  (Hint: it coincides with the date of the aforementioned highest income tax bracket drop to 50% and, eventually, lower.)
    HatefullGdemamicraftseeker

    image
  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,275
    DMKano said:
    Hatefull said:
    DMKano said:
    https://mobile.twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1095374774728048640

    "As they brace for today's layoffs, Blizzard employees are crying and hugging in the parking lot, according to a person there."

    Man my heart goes out to them. The feeling of the impending job loss is the worst.

    Anticipation sucks - especially when the outcome is bad.
    I work as a contractor, similar to what this is. Never get comfortable, even on years-long jobs you have to be prepared to be unemployed at a moments notice. Or switch to a more stable career field. I am not happy to hear this but it is not the end of the world and I doubt very much last week was the first inklings (internally) that this was going to happen.

    Sucks, but life goes on.



    It wasn't - they were notified before due to California law on mass layoffs (modifed WARN act) - they had to give advance notice and a severance package

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_Adjustment_and_Retraining_Notification_Act_of_1988

    "In addition to the WARN Act, which is a federal law, several states have enacted similar acts that require advance notice or severance payments to employees facing job loss from a mass layoff or plant closing. For example, California requires advance notice for plant closings, layoffs, and relocations of 50 or more employees regardless of percentage of workforce, that is, without the federal "one-third" rule for mass layoffs of fewer than 500 employees. Also, the California law applies to employers with 75 or more employees, counting both full-time and part-time employees"
    Yeah great, they had time to prepare. I hope they did. I am also well aware of the WARN act, I am also well aware that there will be a pre-notify before the "official" notify gets published.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • HatefullHatefull Member EpicPosts: 2,275
    Phry said:
    Hatefull said:
    danwest58 said:
    Like I said I expected this Esports thing to come crashing down on these companies.   So its no surprise that the Esports groups will get laid off.   Anyone who thinks this really would have taken off has no idea about ESports.   How did StarCraft become an Esport back in 1999?   I can tell you it was not because Blizzard was pushing it to be an ESport.  It just naturally happened from players like myself that like the game and ended up having local tournaments on our college campus.  

    Now I am sorry to see these employees being let go.  With that said, I think Activision needs to just make me their next CEO.  I would turn that company back into a private company.  I would call in the people that came up with Micro-Transactions into my office and FIRE them right on the spot.  I would fire every manager that was pushing game changes on the game developers because these managers wanted to focus on money not making a good game.  I would fire the managers that pushed the Esports.   I would also move Blizzard out of California to the Mid West to reduce cost.  I would also fire the all the GAMES JOURNALIST companies that tried to push SJW bull crap into the games and any managers I mean Activist hired by the company.  

    Then I would push the Game developers to get back to making games without cash shops with a subscription model, focus on the games and making them fun for customers.  NOT making games for shareholders, Activist and want to be Esports people.   I would Also shut down Diablo Immortal and make D4 and refocus the team on making new IPs and new games for current IPs.    
    I seriously have not laughed that hard in a while. That was awesome, great job bringing some levity to an otherwise very unhappy discussion. lol.
    funny perhaps, but there are a lot of good points in there, the SJW 'bc' has destroyed more than a few games now, the journos we don't have to worry so much about as most of them are gradually being sacked anyway, yeah, managers whatever, basically whoever it is that is pushing microtransactions at the expense of gameplay, i'd sack not just them but all the mobile focused ones too. ;)

    1. Good luck getting people to work for you when they can be fired because you don't like what they are working on.

    2. Good luck getting a job yourself when the Shareholders realize you are grossly imcompetant and give you the sack

    3. I would turn that company back into a private company...the ignorance contained in that statement alone is what made me LOL for real.

    4. Failure to keep up with industry trends, yeah another way to go broke fast.

    I get where you two are coming from, but the business world simply does not work like that. Great if it did, but it doesn't. The only way you are even partly the master of your own destiny is if you start and maintain control of your own company and then you are still heavily regulated. I would fire them, I would change this, no, you wouldn't. You would be sacked within hours without approval of the board. Not to mention the HR nightmare that would ensue.

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • AlverantAlverant Member RarePosts: 1,157
    rodarin said:
    yet despite this still historical lows in unemployment....
    Too bad most of those jobs don't pay a living way. Expect the unemployment rate to go up as more businesses close due to tariffs.
  • AlverantAlverant Member RarePosts: 1,157
    As a wise person I know stated,

    Ambitious people that are willing to work will always find a good job.
    I would guess at considering Blizzard workers upper end like Microsoft. 
    They'll be OK, i'm sure   o:)
    That wise person was wrong. Luck has more to do with finding a "good" job and getting wealthy than anything else.
    Gdemamicraftseeker
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    The basis of capitalism and what these entitled, scale rigging, cheating c#%ts do with capitalism are 2 different things. That's the problem

    Watching some of you nutmegs go on about poverty and wealth like these persons don't use their pocket change to nefariously swing the balance of capitalism/wealth distribution is cute yet typical though.

    There isn't even much point in bringing up inflation and how cost of living goes up, for the same people who can't get raises or any hikes in baseline wage. "They got cell phones tho hurr durr"

    We just watched a game company get a nice increase in profits and promptly sh!# can 8% of their workforce.

    Where the f#$% are all the patriots who all are about returning to "greatness"? Are they talking about when a person could work in a factory and live a nice middle class life? HA!

    A return to that greatness would require we not grab pitchforks and torches to defend the ultra-rich when that 70% marginal tax rate on the highest bracket is mentioned (that being the same high-end rate America maintained during the 50s, 60s, and 70s, only being reduced to around 50% in the 80s).  Oddly enough: guess when income inequality in America started spiraling out of control?  (Hint: it coincides with the date of the aforementioned highest income tax bracket drop to 50% and, eventually, lower.)
    The irony of it is all is, the dumbest of the dumb who had to stop chasing the red hat WWE rallies and face reality for a moment, are now the same ones crying about their income tax returns.
    MadFrenchiecraftseeker
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    Hatefull said:
    Phry said:
    Hatefull said:
    danwest58 said:
    Like I said I expected this Esports thing to come crashing down on these companies.   So its no surprise that the Esports groups will get laid off.   Anyone who thinks this really would have taken off has no idea about ESports.   How did StarCraft become an Esport back in 1999?   I can tell you it was not because Blizzard was pushing it to be an ESport.  It just naturally happened from players like myself that like the game and ended up having local tournaments on our college campus.  

    Now I am sorry to see these employees being let go.  With that said, I think Activision needs to just make me their next CEO.  I would turn that company back into a private company.  I would call in the people that came up with Micro-Transactions into my office and FIRE them right on the spot.  I would fire every manager that was pushing game changes on the game developers because these managers wanted to focus on money not making a good game.  I would fire the managers that pushed the Esports.   I would also move Blizzard out of California to the Mid West to reduce cost.  I would also fire the all the GAMES JOURNALIST companies that tried to push SJW bull crap into the games and any managers I mean Activist hired by the company.  

    Then I would push the Game developers to get back to making games without cash shops with a subscription model, focus on the games and making them fun for customers.  NOT making games for shareholders, Activist and want to be Esports people.   I would Also shut down Diablo Immortal and make D4 and refocus the team on making new IPs and new games for current IPs.    
    I seriously have not laughed that hard in a while. That was awesome, great job bringing some levity to an otherwise very unhappy discussion. lol.
    funny perhaps, but there are a lot of good points in there, the SJW 'bc' has destroyed more than a few games now, the journos we don't have to worry so much about as most of them are gradually being sacked anyway, yeah, managers whatever, basically whoever it is that is pushing microtransactions at the expense of gameplay, i'd sack not just them but all the mobile focused ones too. ;)

    1. Good luck getting people to work for you when they can be fired because you don't like what they are working on.

    2. Good luck getting a job yourself when the Shareholders realize you are grossly imcompetant and give you the sack

    3. I would turn that company back into a private company...the ignorance contained in that statement alone is what made me LOL for real.

    4. Failure to keep up with industry trends, yeah another way to go broke fast.

    I get where you two are coming from, but the business world simply does not work like that. Great if it did, but it doesn't. The only way you are even partly the master of your own destiny is if you start and maintain control of your own company and then you are still heavily regulated. I would fire them, I would change this, no, you wouldn't. You would be sacked within hours without approval of the board. Not to mention the HR nightmare that would ensue.
    Perhaps, but i also see shareholders as being a problem, the insane issues we are getting with microtransactions dominating gameplay, is because companies are trying to keep shareholders happy at the expense of their customers. As for HR nightmares, you can usually avoid a lot of that by just not having a HR department, that even saves you money, because on average, the Janitor is more productive than the HR team :p
    Gdemami
  • CryomatrixCryomatrix Member EpicPosts: 2,813
    Alverant said:
    As a wise person I know stated,

    Ambitious people that are willing to work will always find a good job.
    I would guess at considering Blizzard workers upper end like Microsoft. 
    They'll be OK, i'm sure   o:)
    That wise person was wrong. Luck has more to do with finding a "good" job and getting wealthy than anything else.
    By luck if you mean who you are born to, i agree, as i think upbringing is a huge factor and influencing factor in life.

    But if you mean just dumb luck to be wealthy and people who happen to be wealthy due to luck instead of hard work, then i disagree.
    Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix
    You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations. 
Sign In or Register to comment.