I suppose that one consequence of gaming getting to the mainstream is we find out that, not surprisingly, execs in video games are just as horrible as execs in other fields. Thirty years ago we could pretend there was something special about making computer games. Now we realize that, nope, at a certain level it becomes just the same BS as any other industry.
With the added bonus, I suppose, of originating from a community characterized by its insularity, homogeneity, and lack of self-esteem.
I mean, you folks have read the stories about Atari, right?
Piss off employees? Meh.
Piss off the Board? Watch out.
Menzo
2243
Note that neither Kotick nor Activision deny any of the allegations. Instead, like the previous round, they talk about changes they’ve implemented since, or make platitudes about the future.
Enidigm
2244
That’s horrifying.
I want a list of games to actively avoid rather than choosing not to purchase now.
“Oh, but if you don’t buy their games, then you’re hurting the good employees!”
Menzo
2246
The stories that have generally been shared about the early days of the gaming industry paint a picture of a group of young people having fun and engaging in consensual activities in the freewheeling days of the late 70s and early 80s.
Now I imagine it wasn’t all wine and roses for everyone at the time, but that’s at least the picture that was painted.
That’s very different than reports of rape and harassment.
Brooski
2247
Yeah. This one, they just straight-up admit:
The infamous Roberta Williams hot tub ad from that era comes to mind.
From Roberta Williams’ account it was all a crazy party - until it wasn’t. And that happened once the big money suits got involved.
It’s truly naive to think the “freewheeling days of the 70’s and 80’s” had less misogyny than the last two decades just because light has been shining in all corners of business on misogynistic behavior.
The classic hot tub stuff and all? Oh yeah. What we are seeing is what happens when suddenly successful insecure nerds get to the wildly wealthy stage.
CraigM
2251
Well that is all sorts of awful.
cornchip
2252
Seems you can’t just apologize for threatening to have someone killed, when you actually are wealthy and connected enough to easily do it. Makes it a prosecutable threat, with or without the cooperation of the victim, right?
Don’t know about specifics of that state penal code whether this would be something or not, but in any case even if it was the SOL on it has surely run unless you can make a case it tolled because it wasn’t discovered till recently or something.
Well it looks like he settled it out of court. Getting money and getting far away may have been a fair exchange for the person receiving the voice mail.
This is the only incident that, to me, has added anything new.
Most of the others have been situations of inequality or trying to coerce consent. The inequality in pay is an easier thing to see in black and white than what constitutes coercion. I’ll leave you to that exercise in the grey areas …
It is also one thing to coerce consent, for sex or a power advantage. It is different thing to really get off (emotionally) on the coercive aspect, rather than just be pleased with the benefit you gained. People that are in it for the coercion are usually somewhere on the psychopath scale.
Threatening to kill a subordinate is pretty clearly over all moral lines anyone should know by adulthood. So no excuses on was it really coercion there. It is also one thing to think, I have power, lets get laid! a lot! And another to think: I have power, if you don’t do what I want then maybe I’ll just threaten to kill you.
It also goes to prove the saying that poor psychopaths go to jail, rich psychopaths go to boardrooms.
Brooski
2256
From a link on the page above, also not The Onion but just as close.
Measured scientifically, my output was up 11137.4%
My work efficiency remained at 0.001%.
