this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
185 points (97.9% liked)

Gaming

20015 readers
945 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 41 points 6 months ago (18 children)

I know a lot of indy game developers do their thing hoping to get rich from it. And there's nothing wrong with that. And they don't all do that. Some people just really love coding and creating, and just want to make a cool game. Nothing wrong with that, either.

But for once, I'd love to see some brilliant founder create a game studio that has some kind of poison pill clause that prevents it from ever going public or it's IP ever being purchased by a large mega-corp. And in my wettest of wet dreams, that idea becomes a meme.

Something tells me that here in the United States of Greed, such a thing is 'un-possible', legally speaking. Our whole corrupt system is set up to make half a dozen business bros get wealthier. They won't tolerate anything that jams a wrench into that machinery.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I believe that company name is Valve.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

TIL Valve has a poison pill clause. Cool.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't know that they have a poison pill clause but Gabe is a billionaire who doesn't seem to have interest in having external people direct the company. Thanks to Steam, valve can do what it wants. There is little benefit for them to go public given the extra scrutiny that comes with being a public company.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago

Yeah, I love Gabe, and I love Steam. Even if it was created because he dropped that installation disk on the floor.

My dream is that the poison pill thing becomes very effective and very common, and I think some folks kind of missed the nuances. Which is fine, that's why we have a forum to hash this stuff out.

load more comments (16 replies)