Stop the hatred!

General
134

Don’t know if there is a difference in the mindset here. Where I’m from this is called getting what is deserved without any intent. Sure some people will have ill intends others will have their point prooven but without someone saying “Crush and burn you pathetic human scum you are good for nothing and I wish the plague upon you for no valid reason!” ill intend would never be on the table here.

Yeah but if I worked at EHG I would look for a new job for at least some months by now. If I descide I stay on a sinking ship I’ll drown at some point or not if things go back to normal. It would be up to me if I trust in the managment or if stay on the railroad while a train is coming.

Yeah but who should take the blame at this point? We can only say EHG because we have no insight in the process. We can’t point at anyone and EHG as an entity made the descissions they made. People effected by this can take their own actions and stay aligned with it or move on. Noone is tied down there I guess. As long as noone says “I’m accountable for this and take my leave because I messed up!” we only can talk about EHG.

I once worked for Siemens and noone would hire me because I worked for Siemens. Took some time to find out why and to react accordingly. Was everything involved with Siemens at fault for it? Nah! Still it was a death sentence at the time for future work in the field. The only one accountable for this was myself. I should’ve done my homework before working there and what it implies.

That’s a real far fetch. So I could say someone has ill intend because he didn’t sadi “good morning” so he’s whishing me no good. So after googeling a bit I’ll never use this phrase ever that’s far to stupid an applicable to everything… this makes equaly little sense to me then calling people a whatever phobe just to throw arround buzz words.

I think we can throw this into the same box as the broad stroke that “ill-intend” is. People who say EHG should suffer for example are most obviously talking about the people who messed up and not the whole entity. If we are nitpicking we can do this both ways and reach no goal.

So after all… yes it would be nice if people were more specific if they think Judd should suffer consequenses (just as an example) or everyone who nodded along bad descissions or the whole of EHG. Maybe that’s why Kulze is up the fence as well because in Germany saying “XYZ is a hellhole and should be purged from earth” is a rather normal thing to say a company while only talking about the brand and noone specificly. If person A in this company is accountable for a downfall we directly talk about said person. So while in one part talking about the comapny as whole we talk about noone involved but just about the name of the brand. A good example might be Tesla while Elon did his thing in america. So Tesla was the laughing stock and people made fun, rude remarks and whatnot about it and wishing the brand Name ill, not a specific person involved whe ntalking about Tesla. Some people talked about Elon directly for this regard and never a worker on a conveyor band was meant with it. maybe there is some kind of difference in the worldview there. For me it’s normal useage of words to say “EHG should be held accountable for the errors they made because actions have consequnses.” Instead of, for example “Judd should be held accountable for the place EHG is in!” because I don’t know it it is his fault. Leagaly I can get into troubble over here pinning the state EHG is in on one person wrongly so maybe that’s why we say things as we do.

That highly depends on the situation. If someone loses a keepsake it’s always bad but that’s why I story my keepsakes securely.

Yeah but it is always subjective vs objective and that’s why we have this discussion. We can’t point our finger on a specific individual so we talk about the entity as a represent for everyone who did something wrong in our subjective perception. We can’t make objective statements outside of “they said completely different stuff back in the day.”.

I wrote a bible up there about talking about brand vs specific ppl in germany. Is this something you do as well or know as well? Because if so we have a bit of a cultural thing to solve first because for me everything starts to make sense little by little given what Llama is saying and how to use “ill-intend” according to language and definition pages on the internet.

Now I starting to write bibles again sorry :smiley:

2 Likes
135

No, you & Macknum are arguing in defense of removing an entire company’s worth of people’s livelihoods.

That’s because it is. You, personally (& I know you’ve said that they should be fired because you believe they are incompetent), don’t want them to earn a wage to feed themselves or their families. You sure that isn’t ill will?

As I said before, “just to put that there”, ill will covers way more than just wishing bodily harm to people.

Strawman, never once did I mention GGG.

No, the employees are the “individuum” here. And your lack of compassion and empathy is stagering.

And you’ve learned nothing of empathy? That maybe the kind of individually focussed “me me me” mentality you defend might possibly be related?

You don’t have to be callous either.

Obviously not, but arguing that it’s a good thing that people loose their jobs is hardly a nice thing. One might almost call it “ill will” towards those people… Did I at any point say you should? Go find a point where I did, otherwise you’re just coming up with strawman arguments again.

I never said you should. But thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Nobody is saying that. You’re either missunderstanding or not paying attention.

All I’m saying is that wishing that people loose their jobs is a dick move & “ill will”. That’s all.

It’s possibly a language difference.

Yup, that is a choice each employee needs to make.

That’s what some people have said.

And yes, people are dicks online & like to throw words around because they’re used to doing that.

Oh, sorry, was I supposed to be compassionate towards that? Funny how that works.

136

Now a serious question:
What the fuck are you on about?

Imagine Nestle goes ahead and does extra big shit you don’t wanna support anymore.
So now ‘to make sure the poor employees’ keep their work you gonna keep on buying from em?
Even if you cannot support what they do?
Because of the workers?

Grow the fuck up, that’s not how a business works. Business is not based on fucking welfare, there’s welfare for a reason… is when you’ve gotten unlucky and are out of a job because business fucked up.

You as a damn individual are not responsible to uphold those people, actually you’re a detriment to society if you do it out of that specific reason you stated.
Why?
Because you further the existence of bad quality for customers and allow companies to keep doing that at no cost, hence causing a overall reduction of quality and a worse experience for everyone the longer it progresses.

Oh for fuck’s sake… :man_facepalming:

That’s slander by the way.

I don’t give a single shit about any individual worker there. I’m not mother theresa… I don’t know anyone there personally, they are not my concern plainly spoken.

Not giving a shit is very different from ‘ill will’. The second has what we already had discussed shortly ago, and that is intent.
No, I don’t intent for them to go to the streets.
I just don’t give a shit that it’s a side effect. It’s not my direct action and will for that to happen though. Optimally they get absorbed into another developer group under Krafton and they can work on as if nothing happened from Day 1 to Day 2. Hurray!
But if it doesn’t happen? Not my responsibility still.

We’re talking about the responsibility of one entity here. That entity is EHG.
That this entity is comprised of several people is of no matter.
It’s individual responsibility.
EHG did shit, EHG has to deal with the results.

If it would be group responsibility then PoE or TL:I would’ve to stand up for the mistakes of LE.
Your argumentation line is utterly out of the left field here.

Once more, we’re talking about the ‘concept’ of the company.
The company did shit, the company has to deal with it.

It’s disgusting to think because it has further effects you can simply handwaive off responsibility.
That’s individual generosity and goodwill. It has nothing to do with the core concept of responsibility itself.

And once again responsibility is the fundamental societal contract. Anything beyond is a bonus but not mandatory.

You get the basics and you thank others for any step beyond. Simple as that. You don’t take it as a base premise and attack others for not going ‘the extra mile’. That’s disgusting and I’ll stand by that. It’s one of the most apalling social concepts as it’s the basis for how unpaid overtime, peer pressure into detrimental actions and much more comes to pass.

Empathy is not actionable. It’s understanding and sharing the emotional burden. It’s not a physical action like giving someone money. Which you’re asking here for in this case. ‘Give EHG more money so their poor workers don’t loose their job’. Well… fuck em, I use my money to support myself and those in my personal environment, that’s hard enough to handle already, everyone else can starve for what I care.

Doesn’t mean I want em to, just means I don’t want to burden myself with extra things which are vastly behind my responsibilities.

If you’re so ‘empathic’ then why the actual fuck are you here and not in friggin bangladesh giving away all your possessions to feed starving kids there and teach them how to support themselves in the future?
Because that’s the end-result of your ask… so don’t hold this ‘holier then thou’ shit over others. And even then you’re still in no position to do so because self-sacrifice is not in the basic societal contract and hence not to be expected. You can always hope for it, and it’ll happen… but you cannot ask for it.

I act on the things in my surroundings, piss the fuck off with anything beyond that. Don’t care.

Once more, utterly apalling. I’ve helped people out of suicidal thoughts. I’ve supported emotionally and financially people I know beyond what 99% of humanity does to each other.
And you wanna tell me I should care for some randos I’ve solely got a business relationship with and use the energy direly needed for what’s going on around me rather for someone I don’t know and hence don’t give a single shit about?

If that’s callous then I’ll gladly be so. We need vastly more callous people in this world then, misguided empathy is extremely dangerous just to mention. You need to know when to take action and when not, not just blindly ask people to rush forward.

When and where have I argued that it’s a good thing for someone to loose their job?

It’s solely a side-effect of the thing I state I won’t mind to happen.
I don’t ask for ‘tear this company down!’. I stated it’s up to everyone on their own to go beyond the expected amount, which by the fucking way doesn’t even state if I’m personally included or not.
Plainly spoken if I’m urged to go the extra mile though then I generally don’t want to, just saying.
But in personal absolutes for me? Depending on the state of the game when the expansion happens I’m willing to pay for a expansion. I’m unwilling to pay for a class no matter what and I’m also unwilling to have any form of P2W in the game no matter how small. The factor which makes me play LE compared to PoE was (as it’s loosing parts of it) twofold. Offline mode (hence permanent ownership) and the complete lack of any functional in-game purchases of any kind.

So why should I care for anything beyond that? Once more… do I look like a damn welfare program?
So why are you asking me about it?

Why are you urging me emotionally about it?

That’s what I find disgusting and why I state it repeatedly. You got no damn right to do that to anyone, ever.

Oh, but otherwise I’m callous and lack empathy, don’t I? :slight_smile:

So, which is it?

Yep, then re-read maybe because I didn’t even do that.

Unless you wanna twist ‘not caring’ into an active action again.

137

As I said above… that’s why we say “nestle is kind of evil.” arround here. We never talk about a specific person (not even the CEO or the board or a nemploye) but about the brand, the name Nestle so to speak. It looks like it’s a different thing in english speaking countrys. Come on that’s rather obvious right now ^^.

On top of it I guess we think employes should do the reasonable thing and get a new job instead of staying with companys that are questionable BUT I at least get it. It’s not easy to find a good job and it’s important to bring food to the table. That’s why we most likely never think in depth about employees because you have to do what you have to do.

This is no excuse and not making things better but take a look at the conversation. It seems to boil down to things beeing handled differently elsewhere and most likely even in some parts of germany as well. So what we have here is a missunderstanding :rofl: .

So Kulze everyone speaking against us saying it’s an EHG issue see everything involved with EHG that’s where they come from. We only talk about the brand so to speak and how the brand fucks things up without including anything to it. It’s like sport shoe company xyz makes nice shoes but sadly said shoes are made by children and that’s not okay. We aim for a brand name so to speak if we can’t point at specific people.

I remeber at one point in a job I had a boss who messed up and I told him so. It wasn’t a comapny problem but a problem with the personal that made things worse.

here we point at the brand Name, like in your Nestle example, because that’s how we do things. My dad bought one faulty Bosch machine and never touched a Bosch machine ever again because it’s Bosch. Not because he got one faulty device because of the label.

Here are just two completely different mindsets meet each other and it’s more like a cultural debate then anything else because we talk about the same thing in a completely different matter.

So for the sake of it we could simply say “Everyone who is involved in this mess that makes things worse from our point of view should take their leave or change their mind so things can get better because right now things aren’t looking good.”. I get it that’s overcomplicated and kind of far to much mental gymnastics for me personaly but I’m not here to debate language and cultural differences but the Problem EHG has created one way or another and how people talk about it.

Noone, from my point of view, is wrong here but I see that the way of thinking and talking from my blunt german mindset to whatever other persons are from might be misunderstood or interpreted in way that makes me look evil. I don’t care to much about that BUT at the long run it makes things worse because we talk with each other about almost nothing while there still is the elephant in the room about what EHG is doing, where it is coming from and why they still refuse to openly communicate.

2 Likes
138

No, just keep it proportionate. Don’t blow everything out of proportion, like with your Amazon example. Or Nestlé.

EHG didn’t do extra big shit. They didn’t poison thousands of people, they didn’t cause a natural disaster, and they didn’t cause anything that cleaning up will cost the public billions.

No, that’s not what is being talked about.

There is a difference between stopping to support a company, and actively advocating (and suggesting legal action) so that they rather go bankrupt instead of allowing them to change a pricing model.

I didn’t tell you or others that you have to do anything. I’m merely stating how I perceive what people are doing, and I advocate for not being as much of a dick to others.

It’s called Meinungsfreiheit in Germany.

1 Like
139

You sure about that?

That was the first one to pop up on a search without having to search for synonyms for “fired”.

Repeatedly, when you say things like “sucks for them, tough luck when you fuck up”.

No, I’m not. Please go back & re-read my posts 'cause I’ve never said that. You know how you say you’ve not said stuff & get all huffy (like above)? What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

And it’s disgusting to say that everyone should be punished equally.

It’s quite a bit of mattering. Can you point to me how EHG makes decisions? Is it some hive mind or specific individuals? Are EHG something like the Borg?

No, because neither GGG nor XD are part of EHG, they don’t make decisions for EHG. Judd & the rest of the senior leadership team at EHG make the decisions at EHG. EHG are not a body in the same way that a human body is a conglomeration of cells. Employees do not suddenly loose sentience & the capability to make decisions when they join a company. When people on the internet say that a company should be burned to the ground for making bad/evil/whatever decisions, that’s actual people who are making those bad/evil/whatever decisions, not some non-corporeal entity.

You mean the one that I’m not making? Have you ever worked for a large company before? Did decisions just magically appear out of thin air or were individual people making the decisions (jointly or severally)?

Yeah, I get that but to me it feels like that makes it “ok” (or less bad perhaps) for people to make those kinds of unethical decisions because they can hide behind the brand/company. Fundamentally, it’s always people making decisions & I don’t think it’s right to let them hide behind the body corporate. IMO, it’s only be taking personal responsibility for the decisions we make that society can move towards a place where that kind of shit happens less often.

1 Like
140

LoL this made my day but I guess this will go in circles for an even longer time now. I said my part out loud and at least tried to shed some light on this topic and the viewpoints where I come from. have fun going in circles… that’s one way to stop the hatred towards EHG for sure :slight_smile: .

I think it’s unethical to abuse countries where families need to send their children to work because they need money. At the end (oh boy this sounds evil for sure) they make the poorest even poorer because they can’t use child labor anymore because they are called out for it.
I would LOVE if the people who mess up beeing hold accountable. Without going into detail or talking about politics. We have a politican here in germany who fail up. Did some shady deals ws draged through the news about it and nothing happened to him and he got promoted so to speak.
As long as everyone with enough influence and money is getting away nothing will change. The redacted Epstein files might proof this point sadly if we ever see them.

I think the saying “The fish smells from the head.” is a thing in other languages as well and not only in germany. It’s sadly fitting.

2 Likes
141

As soon as EGH hitched their ride to Krafton, the worst company in gaming, it was the beginning of the end for LE. Just by association LE is now in trouble. Steam reviews have soured and damage is being done. LE took everything it had going for itself and traded it in to be in Kraftons corner. The same company that screwed over Subnautica 2 devs on purpose as proven in court. People hate Krafton so its going to be hard to dig themselves out of this deep deep hole. Not impossible but nearly so.

142

Retracting from their initial statement for why I bought this product is indeed ‘extra big shit’ for me.

Didn’t mention any of the disasters or that stuff. Just for me as a customer.
Much like I don’t buy Blizzard games… or EA games… or - with one single exception of Trackmania - Ubisoft games.
All on my ‘don’t even show me this’ list on Steam for a reason. Company does bad means for me company won’t get any sort of time from me. Unless they show their direction is substantially changing.

EHG hasn’t done that stuff yet. Just hinted at it. That’s why I’m still here.
The second a paid character comes out I’m dust in the wind.

Is there?

The question was ‘would you rather have them go bancrupt then to pay for the class’.

That was my answer, ‘bancrupt’.

So now let’s follow the logical conclusion, should we?

If from the multiple-choice question of 2 answers ‘buy class’ and ‘bancrupty’ I choose ‘bancrupty’ I get thrown arguments at my head related to ‘How dare you do that! You would rather see the people on the street!’.
So I can only pick the first which is ‘buy class’ as a reasonable answer, right?
Hence ‘I cannot stop my support’ for the reasonable answer provided, since that is inherently included in the question anyway, simply answering between those 2 choices takes away the nuance kinda, doesn’t it?

So now my only leftover choice is ‘do it at my own cost despite not wanting to’ which is the sole leftover solutions… as I’m not allowed to pick the other without getting flak and being insulted about having no empathy, being callous, a dick and so on.

So go ahead… tell me exactly how my answer to a direct question with 2 choices was unacceptable :slight_smile:
Still appalling beyond end.

Yep, obviously for fucks sake. Want all of them on the street after over-hiring massively?

I mean… come on… don’t become a massive clown now.
‘Company not profitable, bleeding tons of money, still hiring.’… maybe stop hiring and remove the people which were hired beyond your means?

Sorry… but that’s how you keep the doors open and at least some people with a damn job…

Doesn’t state good.

States solely that when you play dumb games you get dumb prices.

Responsibility and results.

Then lets reframe my argument since there seems to be a massive problem with perception. So from the top basically:

We have 100 employees.
Let’s say every employee (example numbers simply) costs 3000 per month, which we’ll for the sake of the argument say they need fully to survive their day to day stuff. Rent, food, and so on.

Now… the company bleeds for example… 90k per month. We got 3 months left before it shutters if we don’t change that.

Now what do you do? You got basically 2 options since in 3 months you cannot turn the ship around that much.

Option 1: You pay everyone less money, so every single employee either looses their home or starves themselves.
Option 2: You remove 30 employees to be at a net-zero. 70 people can survive onwards.

Which is your choice? Do you sacrifice all of em… or sacrifice some of em to keep things going?
Wanna hear my solution? The hard one? The one which you get flak for but is the only viable one?
Guess which one it is then…

As the concept of the company entity? Yes they are the borg basically. Sorry but here we differ between individuals and companies.

But… I don’t have a relation with the individual employee, I only have one with the company.
One appendage of the company (a employee) will potentially interact with me for specific aspects… but at large I do interact with the whole things of ‘the company’.

So I don’t speak about ‘Bob from customer support’ but about ‘EHG’. Because who do you fault with a cummulative decision? You got the top which decides. You got the lower rungs which either haven’t spoken up when something goes awry or haven’t stood up for it. You cannot fault the lower rung either because of the power difference. You cannot even fault the top-brass entirely because they don’t get the info directly but through second or third channels and got other stuff to do and loose the connection.

So who do you blame?

Leaves only to blame ‘the concept of the company’.

143

Yes, but that’s a you-problem. Outside an egocentric bubble, it’s a minor issue of company behaviour.

I’m not suggesting at all that you should buy anything else from LE if you’re not happy with the product.

So, where did I ask that at any point?

1 Like
144

So if that’s “extra big shit”, I guess child labour & the shady stuff that Nike/Apple/etc have done is a crime against humanity & every employee (including all employees of the their competitors, obviously) should be put to death.

I mean, the’ve not hinted at it, they’ve said they’re doing it.

Yes. There is stuf inbetween super-white & super-black. I believe the rest of the world calls it “shades of grey”. That’s why legal jurisdictions have a variety of punishments other than nothing & the death penalty.

145

First off… not going into the hyperbole of Llama who knows completely well that there’s a distinction and I’m utterly sick and tired of explaining those in novels which should be common sense from the get-go.
But also missed entirely the point.

But the one from you Horus is a decent one to get into:

Yes, obviously it’s about the egocentric bubble.
Who would I need to care or have to care as a customer what other customers think, want, and drive their decisions on?
That’s the obvious thing here that it’s a egocentrical bubble decision, and it doesn’t have to be more.

Not every decision has to become some holistic world saving thing :stuck_out_tongue:

It all started with this:

And the answer:

It’s taken literal, it’s obvious to be the exception of some dimwits being included. First problem and went a step too far hence. But my explanation then pushed it all off ending with this part:

For clarification:
Ill-will demands intent.
Not caring is simply not taking the burden of the world onto your back.

It’s impossible to do after all, and if you try you’ll ruin yourself and everyone around you at best.
You would need to start thinking in terms of… ‘is this tomatoe I’m trying to buy ethical now in all aspects?’ What about pesticies used? Endangering animal or human well-being with it in some way if so? is the farmer well payed? The transport properly handled? The driver well paid? How about the grocery shop displaying it, only using ethical products overall and hence right to be supported? Is the employee there paid well?

It becomes a mess. Hence you stop at a stage very close to yourself. You improve the narrow area around you and hope others do the same so it becomes overall better.

Anyone which asks for actions accordingly but isn’t going out into the world to go to the places needing the absolute most of change and doing it directly is a hypocrite and should piss off. And that’s what pushed it off entirely.

My argumentation line went from ‘not taking over responsibility which is not yours isn’t evil’… which is a truthful statement. As that’s idiocy if you universally follow it. And the differantiation between goodwill and responsibility… which clearly is not a concept well known as the answers provided specifically from @Llama8 . It’s important, learn the difference.

Scale is of no matter here… small wrong is still wrong, large wrong is still wrong. It matters only for outcome, not for the foundational principle.

Your argument @HorusKBZ was for:

And my whole argumentation line was ‘I won’t provide a company money which doesn’t uphold the trust-basis between me and them in business terms’.
That’s it.

And from there I got called callous, lacking empathy and so on.

Which comes down to ‘Do you rather have them go bancrupt or pay for the class’.

Does that suffice as a logical roadmap? (By the way, more information then EHG’s roadmap and I didn’t need 7 weeks for it!)

If you talk about principle then no, there isn’t inherently. It’s the second step after that as you rightfully state. Circumstance applies for a reason.

146

You can call it ill will, but why should I take responsibility for what EHG the company did? I didnt fuck over the employees, EHG did by taking on too many, and spreading their resources thin.

if I worked at ehg id be pissed that now my job is on the line because the administration above me didnt take care to look out for the company as a whole which is what effects my bottom line as an employee.

“Stupid consumers didnt buy my 1 million dollar 1996 toyata I was forced to sell by my stupid boss, how could they”

or maybe you got fucked over by your stupid ass leadership now you and them either do more stupid shit, or you go down under your new overlords.

Ttrying to appeal to the bleeding heart just isnt gonna fly, especially for anyone in america who gets repeatedly beaten into the dirt by their bosses and managers etc on chain.

At the end of the day it sucks that a lot of people who cared are likely going to lose their jobs in a few years, but thats not my fault nor is it ill-willed to not support their crappy administration/leadership who is tanking the PR of their company.

If anything I hope the devs who do good work jump ship and go someplace else where their work can be used profitably instead of getting run into the dirt by poor leadership.

me hating mcdonalds and hoping they go out of business is not ill-will towards any individual employee working behind a counter, treating corporations like people with souls is what gets us into these messes in the first place.

2 Likes
147

And where in this do you find that I ask people to continue to pay just to save EHG? Whatever someone else wrote has nothing to do with the point I make.

It’s about people like you basically stating that you rather have them close down than ‘breaking their promise’, because if they can’t deliver on that, they would not have a right to exist in the first place. You did say something along that line multiple times, right?

Yes, mostly, that’s why I said in response to you making the point of not caring:

But you have at least twice stated at some points that you want/suggest people to get fired, in the discussion about productivity or how many people work for EHG etc.

You don’t appear to be just not caring - you appear to me as spiteful and vindictive.

Sorry if I consider this ill-will from your part, but I reserve my right to have that opinion.

Aside from that:
Not caring about others is one of the fucking problems why psychopatic assholes who lead companies fuck over customers so often. They don’t have ill-will towards the individual who gets poisoned, or gamble away their fortune with gambling lootboxes boxes. They simply don’t care.

I didn’t imply to take over responsibilty.
There is a difference between stepping away as a customer from a company (voting with your wallet) and wanting them to fail.

1 Like
148

Yep, the model can work, but it’s genuinely a “needle-in-a-haystack” chance. PoE is honestly the exception, not the rule, the “F2P funded off microtransactions” model is almost guaranteed to fail, and is even more likely to fail if it’s “B2P and then funded off microtransactions.”

Their best bet was to use the Krafton acquisition to explain that reality didn’t match their expectations and going forward they’ll be operating off a “classic-style ARPG model with seasons.” Where they’d move to paid expansions w/ bonus classes (like GD, TQ1, and D2) while offering a seasonal ladder like D2.

Sure, they’d have balked on a kickstarter promise, but most long-term fans would have been understanding and most newer fans wouldn’t have known the original promise anyway. Their current strategy is not working.

I just checked in to see if my suspicions after the acquisition were correct, and it seems like they were. Guess GD and TQ2 are the only ARPGs I’ll be playing going forward.

1 Like
149

A lack of care by design cannot be intentful… for intent you need to want it.
If you don’t care you just don’t bother with it, simple as that.

Yes, I want the company to rather close down if they can’t deliver instead of giving them more money.

Do you keep paying someone for not doing what you paid em for? :slight_smile: I mean… you do you… just seems rather nonsensical.

That this is even a point of discussion is utterly baffling.

Yes, I did, and if you don’t want to keep ripping it out of context you would realize what absolute idiotism it is to not suggest this solution, and what bigger one it is to not follow it even.

As stated… company bleeds money. You can now go bancrupt, turn it around or downscale.
Bancrupty is a complete ‘it’s over’, hence obviously not a solution.
Turning it around takes time, and EHG just burned the goodwill of the consumer base to an all-time low. It’s unlikely that this recovers in any reasonable time.

So that leaves only damage control. Every reasonable company downsizes when it’s mandatory to keep their doors open. Because let’s be entirely clear… if EHG doesn’t go ahead to turn a profit then Krafton will either dismantle the studio and take the losses… they’ll demand full control over decisions so they don’t bleed money further. Or they cut their losses and sell for a lower price with the stipulation that the other company buying it can take over control.
That’s the options.

This is not a damn tech startup company to focus on a patent sale and hence using money to sell for more afterwards. This is a ongoing service. You got individual customers. If you don’t provide things customers pay for and/or you’ve not enough customers providing money then you’ll go bancrupt. A service works on ongoing income versus expenditure, not on singular large sales. So to keep it running you gotta have the employee base at a size to stay profitable.
This is not the case, hence obviously you need to reduce the employee count.
The alternative is being more productive, be it through qualitative PR (more willing paying people for the same quality) or by providing quality (more willing paying people for merit).

EHG is absolutely horrendous with their PR since a good while. EHG is awful with their content and quality release since a good while.
So both seem to be unrealistic expectations.

Leaves only downsizing.

It’s idiotic to think otherwise plainly spoken.
Do I wish for it to happen? No, I don’t.
Does it need to or even more people get on the street? Yes, it does.

And people caring too much for the wrong stuff are those enabling those companies to do it in the first place.
They also don’t have ill-will and are empathic, but nonetheless they fuck it up for everyone else.

Just mentioning it, to give a little nudge for thought.

And there’s a difference between wanting them to fail and stating that they deserve to do it.

150

I do, it doesn’t feel like you do. You appear to get so focussed on the principle that you forget any form of pragmatism or reality.

No, just because a person isn’t planning on doing bad things to another person doesn’t mean there’s no ill will. The ill will leads to the intent, not the other way round.

Ill will is a feeling you gave towards someone where you wish harm/bad fortune to them (such as that they’d be made redundant), ill intent is the malicious motive to do some form of harm to someone.

Last I checked, this forum wasn’t a court of law stocked by lawyers.

Which was a strawman since I don’t believe anyone said it was.

151

The term ‘ill-will’ is is simply described as ‘animosity or bitterness’ towards someone and hence wishing them negative things.
That’s the most basic of basic descriptions.

The legal description on the other hand is ‘a conscious, intentional wrongdoing either of a civil wrong like libel (false written statement about another) or a criminal act like assault or murder, with the intention of doing harm to the victim.’
Which already puts the intent into it, no intent… no ill-will.

To harbor negative thought towards someone (individual) rather then something (a concept or a item) hence you need to have a hostile feeling towards that and wish negativity to happen. It’s the darn definition of ill will that you have a will attached to it.

Not providing a thought towards it (Hence not ‘caring’ about something) removes the will from it. Hence you cannot define it as ill-will.

As you personally state:

Where you wish it into someone. Hence intent is there.

And also since it seems to be coming from the word ‘intent’ itself:
Intent outside of the legal definition is stated as ‘The thing you plan to do or achieve’. Hence there is intent of thought present as well, which is the issue seemingly.
If you want them to become jobless then you need to intent it hence. That would be bearing ill-will.
If you state ‘they deserve to close down’ it first of removes the individual from the equation. hence no thought is given towards the individual. This inherently removes intent as there is no want for that. It’s a side-effect, side-effects are not intended.
Also the statement ‘deserve’ is not ‘want’. There is a distinction here as well. If someone deserves something it means you wouldn’t mind it happening best-case. If you want it instead it means you would feel negative if it doesn’t happen. You can want something for someone and they do deserve it. Those are separate things.

In my case I solely stated they deserve it. Not that I want it. What I want is for EHG to pull a No Man’s Sky, because that would be the optimal outcome for everyone, company, employee, customer. It’s a given unless you got some sort of issue to want that.
Which is distinctly different from what they deserve.

152

No, you can step away as a customer. That’s fine.

That I have to repeatedly try to explain the difference between stepping away and actively wanting someone to fail is utterly baffling. It’s not that hard.

I’ll stay, because I never bought into any promise of free content forever. I bought into 5 classes as announced at the steam store page. I’m fine with paying for a 6th, if I think it will be fun and if it is reasonably priced.

The context is your tone. As I said, you appear to me as a spiteful, vindictive person. For someone not caring, your attitude in writing seems to contain quite to much negative emotion.

Sometimes, a company needs to actually expand to produce something that then creates profit. Pushing through, getting additional investment, is sometimes the story of success.

That is not only true for patent selling tech start-ups.

To both, I wholeheartedly agree. EHG seems to be an internal mess with people who are not particularly good at their job.

They were in trouble a long time ago when development of the basic tech of the game took way longer than they anticipated.

I get different vibes.

1 Like
153

Yep, and where did I actively want them to fail?

Downsizing a company is avoiding it to fail… that’s what you don’t get.
Yeah, people loose their job.
You know when they also do that? When the studio gets shuttered for whatever reason. So kinda a priority to avoid that.

That’s a full-on ‘you’ problem.

My attitude in writing is at best being pissed off or annoyed in terms of negativity, but I tend to write the topics themselves as seeing it from a detached position without emotion.

Hence that’s why I’m also willing to simply say ‘throw some of those employees onto the streets’ as that’s what you can do when you’re not needlessly inserting yourself into it and instead try to view it from a outside point.

EHG is overbloated to heaven already in size.

If they’re unable to produce something with that size then they’re not better then all those ‘AAA’ studios which shutter down repeatedly since years now.

It’s a idiotic direction and has been proven over… and over… and over again not only directly in the gaming sector but in history overall.
Hence I don’t see it as a viable option.

Sitll a ‘you’ problem.