this post was submitted on 22 May 2024
621 points (98.9% liked)

Games

32437 readers
1029 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Welp, this didn't take long.

It's especially interesting that they laid off a lot of people who were the only ones in their particular job, leaving entire jobs uncovered. I suspect this comes right before shutting them entirely or doing it all "with AI" ๐Ÿคฎ.

Sad in particular about Alice Bell. She was fantastic, and it always felt like she kept the site going through all the shit of recent years. Plus being the driving force behind their podcast (the Electronic Wireless Show) of course also spells doom for that one though I hope that like Indiescovery they go rogue and run it independent of the site.

Bleak times. Fuck IGN.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'd say this is the perfect time to start a really regular and dedicated games review site. They have to start somewhere and if you're trusted and good then you'll get a following.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

It's tough. A long-standing rule of video games media--even well before web publishing--is that reviews don't pay the bills. Hype gets clicks, as do guides now that independent guide writing has waned.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Yeah... Let's call it.. G4tv

[โ€“] [email protected] 42 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Buying out competition and throwing out the workers confident that investors won't back a small dog against a big one

In an investor run economy, competition means you might lose a bet. For an investor its better to reduce competition than lose bets. This is originally why anti trust legislation was created: The market needs to be forced to compete or it will amalgamate into a giant blob of noncompeting assets.

High taxes exist to reduce accumulation of assets and slow down the snowballing effect of huge investors. This is what the trump tax cuts look like.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

This is originally why anti trust legislation was created

If you look at the history of anti-trust legislation, some of its first uses and biggest targets were labor organizers. Under the Sherman Antitrust Act, one of the first and most notable cases was the US lawsuit against the Workingmen's Amalgamated Council (also known as the "Triple Alliance" of teamsters, scalesmen, and packers) over what was then the largest labor action in US history.

It wasn't until the 1914 Clayton Antitrust Act that unions were granted safe harbor from anti-trust provisions. And it took until 1941 for the courts to finally fully decriminalize labor actions - a process that was ultimately reversed starting in the 1960s under Nixon, and extended under Ford, Carter, and then Reagan.

High taxes exist to reduce accumulation of assets and slow down the snowballing effect of huge investors.

That's the Keynesian approach, certainly. But the Chicago School that came to dominate US economics during the Volcker Era suggested instead that we can adjust the Federal Funds rate to keep malinvestment from derailing an economy. And that this strategy means asset accumulation is now safe and profitable for large corporate interests.

Large investment banks are actually good, because they give us a steady and constant flow of price information on a private market. And since price discovery is the real goal of regulation, the advent of these mega-banks means we can let the institutions regulate themselves without any conceivable downsi- sound of the 2008 market crash

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Really hoping that we see more stuff like Second Wind, though that took some real name recognition (and I suspect some pre-planning) to pull off.

[โ€“] [email protected] 25 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

Buys publication
Immediately fires what makes it tick

???
I don't get it. Am I dumb? Are they buying other publications just for the branding?

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

The violence is the point

[โ€“] [email protected] 20 points 5 months ago

Acquiring a company just for the brand or even just to make it disappear is pretty common in all of the corporate world.

[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago

Quality worsens. Losing a lot of reliable sources for Wikipedia and other free content sites to use.

[โ€“] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago

This is a part of the beginning of it. Centralization results in layoffs and worse products. This is why we have antitrust laws, now they go unenforced because of corruption. AI is going to replace a lot of jobs and we're going to get shittier products while the winning corporations continue to make more money. Winner take all system is bad for everyone.

[โ€“] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

wtf. You can't fire Alice, she is RPS

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

one of the best people in games journalism fired because......?

Seriously fuck late stage capitalism ughh

[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago

I haven't cared about IGN since I was a horny teenager watching Jessica Chobot hosting the daily fix

[โ€“] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

Let the IGN monopoly begin. Gaming journalism has been a joke for years now. But now it's getting worst.

[โ€“] [email protected] 28 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)
  1. Governments should only allow big mergers in exceptional circumstances
  2. Big conglomerates should be broken up

They are bad for the workers, and bad for the consumers. Half of the time, also bad for the shareholders (according to an old McK study). Lives are being ruined for billionaires to gamble for more billions.

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago

Did anyone ever think that any workplace anywhere is about the value produced and wages rather than tribalistic fuckshit?

[โ€“] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

You now have a chance to follow some of their independent blogs, support them that way, fuck all this big companies, they are laying of everyone for ai

load more comments
view more: next โ€บ