this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
rpg
3150 readers
1 users here now
This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs
Rules (wip):
- Do not distribute pirate content
- Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
- Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
- Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
- Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
- Do not advertise for livestreams
- Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
- Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
- No Zak S content.
- Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Not every big conglomerate is just a relentless fuckup machine. Baldur's Gate 3 was made by a Tencent subsidiary. I'm not saying they won't fuck it up, just that there's no reason to assume out of the gate that they automatically will. And, it's legitimately a little hard to see them doing worse than Hasbro has been so far.
Do you have any examples?
I mean, just a quick glance at this list shows some things that seem at least competently managed. They're not a relentless crew of counterproductive own-dick-trippers-over like Hasbro.
That said, the point that they may turn it into a microtransactions bonanza that makes them money but in no way resembles what DND should be is a pretty good one, yes. I was envisioning this future where they realize that the way to make money with it long-term is to just let it be its own thing, but I think there's a pretty good chance that that idea is as absurd as everyone here seems to think it is.
Most of those are just minority investments rather than directly ran by Tencent
Hm, you are right. The story described it as "owns and has huge holdings," but that is wrong -- for Blizzard it's 10%, Bluehole 5%, etc.
Tencent has a minority stake in Larian. That's very different from being wholly owned and managed by them.
And Tencent has a minority stake in, like, every functioning software company that's ever done an investment funding around at this point. They make it a point to diversify their holdings across basically the entire software industry at this point.
They're fairly hands-off in those endeavours, since they're doing it to protect themselves against shifts in the market.
Their in-house made stuff, though, is... Well, let's just say it's efficiently monetized.
Tencent owns 3% of Larian shares. This does not make them a subsidiary, or fully owned.
It's 30%. The point is pretty valid though, and I did have it wrong in saying subsidiary -- I edited my comment to reflect my learning.
Yah, my fat thumb dropped the zero. Oops.