Toxic Actiblizz scandal and lawsuit

Some of us are a tad worried this will be gamergate 2.0 where the sexists/MRAs/incels/etc come out of the woodwork and shit all over everything while pretending they're respectable. So I understand peeps being twitchy.


The most recent news seems to be greg street (aka ghostcrawler) claiming he's a huge moron that didn't notice a thing despite being in the center of it. I suppose that's better than being complicit (or active participant) but not much. If he's that oblivious to what's going on around him then it doesn't bode well to his leadership qualifications in general.

And posts like these is exactly why i don't believe these bullshit lawsuits anymore nor should anyone else btw.
Ppl showed up hangover? Yeah so what? Unproffesional if true but that is illigal how exactly?
There are some veil (unproven) accusations in there for sure, but when mixed in with these petty complaints they lost any and all credebility, not that they had any to begin with.

"

kaijyuu2 wrote:

Some of us are a tad worried this will be gamergate 2.0 where the sexists/MRAs/incels/etc come out of the woodwork and shit all over everything

I acknowledge that there were people on the antifeminism* side of Gamergate who were, to various degrees on a case by case basis, some level of toxic. But there were also people on feminism* side of Gamergate who were, to various degrees on a case by case basis, some level of toxic. If you don't think both of these statements are true, then I have some bad news for you: you probably were, or would have been, one of the toxic individuals on your side of the issue.

I, too, do not want "sexists/MRAs/incels/etc" come out of the woodwork and shit all over everything. But I don't want the toxic sort of the other side to shit all over everything, either. And when you get down to it, they're both two sides of the same coin — one draws in the other, as one rustles the jimmies of the other. I, for one, cringed when I read your post, because now I'm just counting the time until someone wanders in this thread and replies "hey, there's nothing wrong with men's rights advocacy." And, no, I don't want to discuss whether or not that is or is not a true statement — that's the point. The point is that your post put us one step closer to toxic elements shitting all over everything.

One more thing: if you think this is going to be another Gamergate, and you focus purely on the partisan extremes of this issue, what you see will confirm that hypothesis. The worst fringes of the internet are going to be of one of two positions: either in defense of ActiBlizz even if the lawsuit claims are true, or seeking penalties against ActiBlizz even if the lawsuit claims are false. There is nothing you can do to stop the far fringes from having extreme and unsavory opinions, and if you allow your mind to cherry pick examples of the other side from among the extremes, that is what you will see the other side as. But the truth is a lot more complicated, with plenty of people in between these fringes. I think you should at least consider the possibility that someone near the center who came down on one side of Gamergate might come down on the other side of this issue, because the circumstances, while arguably similar, are not the same.

* When I use "antifeminism" and "feminism" here I am simplifying the two sides to an extreme extent — quite possibly oversimplifying them. I do so only for brevity. If you think I've used the wrong terminology, you're probably right. Please, let's not argue semantics.

"

jackof8lades wrote:

Ppl showed up hangover? Yeah so what? Unproffesional if true but that is illigal how exactly?

The legal obligation of the employer is greater than the legal obligation of the employees. If an individual employee behaves unprofessionally once, that doesn't necessarily make the employer liable. But if the employer's negligence allows a culture of unprofessional behavior to take hold, especially if it can be shown that the employer was aware, that is not a safe work environment, and the employer can be legally held liable for that.

Please note that I am discussing labor law, not morality. I don't wish to discuss whether or not such laws are just or not.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

The worst fringes of the internet are going to be of one of two positions: either in defense of ActiBlizz even if the lawsuit claims are true, or seeking penalties against ActiBlizz even if the lawsuit claims are false.

Of course, the results of a lawsuit don't determine whether claims are false, and they certainly don't obligate people to think that everything is fine and no further penalties are deserved etc. Individual people are not the state of California and don't need to treat their opinions as being bound to the same scope and limitations as a particular legal case.

Eh, ugly business, kolyaboo. Thank you for getting this going.

But are any of us surprised? Dudebros have been the dominant force for game development for decades. We are always hearing about the awful collision between their antiquated attitude and excessive means. "Hookers and blow" might be a joke and a cliche but that doesn't mean that the notion that this is indeed how one celebrates success can't take root. Anecdotally a friend of mine went to an after party for Pax Aus run by a very big free to play Dev I shall not name and it was indeed hookers and blow. She wasn't exactly impressed but equally accepted that living some cliched facade of Scarface is how a lot of people answer sudden fame and wealth.

But Blizzard's expose, so to speak, has been unusually raw. It made non gamer news streams because it's a state suit. Because WoW is not just any other MMO but the MMO in the eyes in a lot of casual and former gamers. And then that incredibly bad first response, so tone deaf and indignant every Blizzard talking head and power player from better days had to come out condemning it. Hardly at the top of my list of concerns right now but I'd be lying if I didn't admit it has my daily attention.

But all that slacktivistic commentary aside, I wonder who else here is now less hesitant about playing D2R than they want to be. I absolutely will buy it. I absolutely will play it, specifically to enjoy it with old friends who missed it the first time. I'd like to say I'm now wavering but I'm not. I want to play it and I know I have to pay Blizzard to do so.

Given my other activity on here, I am acutely aware of my hypocrisy. OTOH I never held any illusions that Blizzard staff might be unusually moral or ethical, and everytime I gave them money it was entirely for my own benefit. Maybe it's different with a free to play. Maybe it was different just because GGG were the avowed antithesis to Blizzard for years. Not sure really. Anyway...in this case I am totally going full Me mode and divorcing the product from its producers.


I don't imagine anyone here is happy to take up the banner to the contrary if only because it would make them a huge target, but I am curious to hear from other Exiles who plan to play D2R how they feel regarding these various revelations and the "need" to give Blizzard money to play D2R, ultimately a product not of the current troubled Blizzard but, many would argue, a far more esteemed version thereof.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Dudebros have been the dominant force for game development for decades.

Have they? I would certainly agree with "Dudebros have been the dominant force in the video game player base for two out of the past three decades." (In the last decade it would depend on what you meant by "dominant": how vast of a majority is required for the term to apply?) But there's often a difference between the culture of the consumers of a product, and the culture of the producers of a product. Do you have a shitload of connects in the games industry? Watch a lot of video game development documentaries? Or what?

I have, of course, heard of prominent game players becoming game developers. But I always assumed — not really sure why — that the business of making video games was a professional culture; that famous game players whose hard-partying habits were an open secret would be shunned by potential employers when competition for job openings is crazy high; and that game players would settle down and get serious, and be expected to do so, once they were hired on to an actual developer. Even if my conception of video game players was, for a time, grown boys smoking weed and telling dead baby jokes, I didn't for even a moment think that's what the developers of those games were like.

Point is, I for one didn't read about this lawsuit and think "yes of course." I was thoroughly shocked. And if anyone wasn't shocked: why didn't anyone tell me about the jobs you can get away with showing up drunk earlier? I didn't realize that was even a fucking option.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

I am curious to hear from other Exiles who plan to play D2R how they feel regarding these various revelations and the "need" to give Blizzard money to play D2R

I never had any interest in buying D2R in the first place. And I'm too good at Arena to spend money on Hearthstone. But I've wanted to boycott companies like Google before, and I gave them money anyway, so you tally me in the weak-willed column if the scope of your inquiry goes beyond ActiBlizz.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

D2R, ultimately a product not of the current troubled Blizzard but, many would argue, a far more esteemed version thereof.

Yes, many would. Optimistically, and none too thrilled about looking for evidence to the contrary, I would suppose.

I, too, don't plan on seeing how far down that rabbit hole goes. But I don't make the argument that Old Blizzard was all sunshine and rainbows behind the scenes, either. I reckon that's the intellectually honest way.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

D2R, ultimately a product not of the current troubled Blizzard but, many would argue, a far more esteemed version thereof.

The version of Diablo 2 that's a product of that older Blizzard is playable right now. If people aren't playing it and instead waiting to buy D2R, it's because they want the changes that 'current' Blizzard are responsible for.

Not on console it's not. And you'd be amazed how many gamers don't have a PC around the world. Japan, for instance -- which makes sense given the average size of an apartment there.

So please, ease up on the implicit PC masterrace assumptions. ^_^

And on a more personal note I definitely wouldn't bother with D2R were it PC only. Far superior games to play if I am willing to sit at my desk rather than decline on the couch and no I'm not fixing that tappo.

I promise you I'm not amazed that lots of people don't have PCs, I actually just had no idea it was releasing on consoles too. Makes sense of course, just hadn't occurred to me.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote: But are any of us surprised? Dudebros have been the dominant force for game development for decades.

No, not all that surprised at what went on. More of the extent of it. I used to be a stockbroker, so yeah, I've seen some things. But that was awhile back. And even the worst of my colleagues didn't approach some of the worst goings on over at that place.

And you know my wife is still embroiled in a lawsuit (not class action) with her former employer. Not the same as this though, something similar. Not same industry.