They aren’t cowards. They are legally obligated to make more profit for the shareholders. They couldn’t give a rats ass about anything else. Any public company showing “support” for pride is only doing it because they think it will drive more business than they’ll lose. The system is fucked
Common misconception. Fiduciary Duty means the Board of Directors has to act in a company’s best interest. It does not mean they legally have to maximize every single profit possibility, short and long-term. Some people feel that improving a company’s reputation or outreach is in its best interest, even if it doesn’t increase profits.
It’s also important to know that no one has ever been found guilty of failing to fulfill fiduciary duty, and it’s pretty vague. Companies can still do what they want, don’t let them tell you their hands were tied and they had to do [awful, greedy thing that everyone hates]…
Tim Cook even famously responded to a right-wing troll during a shareholder meeting asking Apple to commit to only doing profitable things and dropping stuff like making their production climate neutral with "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI.” “If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.” and somehow he’s still around
Many screeched omigodtheyreturningmahkidsgay. Many were annoyed at the blatant pretense at support that did zero actual supporting and just hoped to make a buck. The rest didn’t notice or care.
I guess pretend support is still better than no support, but I didn’t believe they were genuine or courageous a year ago, so it’s not surprising for them to confirm it.
It’s hilarious that this thread accuses them of supporting pride to make money was bad but supporting bigotry for money is also bad.
It’s such a perfect microcosm of capitalism and popularity. How gatekeeping good deeds and representation through virtue signaling can turn people away and keep your movement from being funded by billion dollar organizations.
Interesting and not shocking. But I was just making a joke about the fact that one of their main competitors is Patagonia and the drag queen’s name is Pattiegonia
Also not surprising. Chouinard is a lefty who has pledged a ton to environmental causes. I think he put the company into some kind of trust so that the profits will go to environmental causes even after he dies. Really great company
No no, it’s actually a pretty good idea lol. I mean, the exec may very well work at a Wendy’s but that’s probably more so because of all the right wing backlash
Not until Helldivers 2 dies too. I was tricked into thinking it was healing, and then that game exploded.
EDIT: The truth hurts, but that’s still a live service game that’s actively working against the interests of consumers and preservationists. The more money and playtime people give it, the worse this situation gets.
I still don’t think the enemy is “all live service games” exactly. A lot of us have a style of gameplay we enjoy that makes us go “That was fun! I want some more of it.”
Just that Rocksteady made singleplayer games well, and their poor shift just informs us that not all games need to be live service, especially when the gameplay shifts to something no one likes in order to achieve Number Go Up (similar situation with Gotham Knights)
Number can go up without being tied to a server you don’t and can’t control. Those games still get made, from Titan Quest to Borderlands. Nothing about the gameplay loop of Helldivers offends me; the totally unnecessary forced obsolescence does. The thing that makes it a live service game is the thing that makes it incompatible with surviving for more than a few years without an Act of God, like Knockout City. I also hate that people have been trained into differentiating “single player” and “live service”, as though multiplayer must inherently be this way when it doesn’t have to be. A live service game is just an inferior version of a game they could have made that would survive offline, because it’s tied to their servers. Do you think Sony could have mandated a PSN account after the point of sale if it was available DRM-free and allowed you to run your own servers?
There is some hope for these games. For example Shadow of War works perfectly fine now and doesn’t have any of it’s “battle pass” stuff in it anymore. It can happen.
Rarely.
forbes.com
Hot