General Gaming SUNDAY DRAMA! Neil Druckmann/Cory Balrog vs Jason Schreier goin' down on Twitter!

[JPDunks4]

31 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

That is likely the scenario, and that's why it's a shitty thing to do. Nobody should be forced to work so much overtime and CDPR isn't some scrappy developer that can't afford to give their employees a good work/life balance. They're the largest game developer/puboisher in Europe.

 

What is so much Overtime?  Is there a certain amount of compensation that would make it okay?

 

If 1,000 of the 1,100 people working all are okay putting in 1 extra 8 hour day for 6 weeks that is fully paid, does that change anything?

 

I don't know the answers of course, but I simply find the idea that putting out a call for those that are unhappy somewhere, to tell you their side of the story without also digging into those that may not agree with you, isn't the best way to go about convincing anyone of anything. 

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, JPDunks4 said:

 

Why do you assume Game Informers sources inside CDPR are lying, while Jason Schreiers are not?

 

Or that maybe a large percentage of people were asked to vote or give opinions on it and not all.  He simply asked a few of his existing sources as his "investigative" jounalism.  Should we ask, do "nearly" a dozen people speaking for 1,100 people always portray a real accurate story and summary of what actually happened? He actively seeks out those that will tell the story he wants to tell.

 

People are so quick to take everything Jason says as gospel while quickly dismissing any other reporting of the story that doesn't match up with his.

 

what is there for me to be assuming? 

[Paperclyp]

Also he says in the subsequent tweet that it doesn’t make CD PR a villain or anything but crunch IS happening.

 

what is the issue?

[Paperclyp]

Also the GI stuff I saw was from a podcast that suggested that if there WAS a vote (hypothetically) that most people would have voted to crunch. That doesn’t make anything Jason reported that I’ve seen to be untrue. It’s also ironic that that clip of a podcast was taken out of context in efforts to expose JS, when they were doing the very thing they accuse him of doing. 

[Paperclyp]

1 hour ago, thedarkstark said:

This is a very likely scenario.

 

JS asks some low level employees and they say no choice given, but meanwhile behind the scenes the people 1 or 2 levels higher did have a meeting and decided crunch vs delay. Both reports are techincally correct but missing important details. Much easier to democratize 20 team leads vs 1,100 individuals.

if that is the case isn’t this precisely why a story like this would be important for crying out loud?

[Ghost_MH]

18 minutes ago, JPDunks4 said:

What is so much Overtime?  Is there a certain amount of compensation that would make it okay?

 

If 1,000 of the 1,100 people working all are okay putting in 1 extra 8 hour day for 6 weeks that is fully paid, does that change anything?

 

I don't know the answers of course, but I simply find the idea that putting out a call for those that are unhappy somewhere, to tell you their side of the story without also digging into those that may not agree with you, isn't the best way to go about convincing anyone of anything. 

 

I have toddlers. The answer to that question is zero unless there are extenuating circumstances necessitating overtime in limited amounts of time. Even then, any time I've ever asked anyone to work overtime, I've made it up to them in time AND money. Well, money or food and drinks coupled with comp time to make up for the overtime they needed to work.

[skillzdadirecta]

8 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I have toddlers. The answer to that question is zero unless there are extenuating circumstances necessitating overtime in limited amounts of time. Even then, any time I've ever asked anyone to work overtime, I've made it up to them in time AND money. Will, money or food and drinks coupled with comp time to make up for the overtime they needed to work.

I can't speak for CDPR but I've worked for several gaming companies and while the hours can be grueling (My time at Riot nearly broke me mentally) gaming companies have some of the best perks/incentives I've experienced professionally. I guess it's how they justify working their employess so hard during crunch time. It's up to the indivdual to decide if these perks are worth it or not, but this narrative that workers at videogame companies are some exploited underclass is laughable bullshit. Anyone who even considers that has never worked an actual  job before where folks have no idea what "comp time" even is. That said, the gaming industry SHOULD unionize. I don't see that happening anytime soon though.

[JPDunks4]

17 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

Also the GI stuff I saw was from a podcast that suggested that if there WAS a vote (hypothetically) that most people would have voted to crunch. That doesn’t make anything Jason reported that I’ve seen to be untrue. It’s also ironic that that clip of a podcast was taken out of context in efforts to expose JS, when they were doing the very thing they accuse him of doing. 

 

The clip of the Podcast is a female journalist saying she spoke to 15 or so developers at CDPR who told her a different story than what Jason was hearing.  Not just about voting, but about the crunch story in general.

 

People on the internet of course jumped to say that it was all just CDPR's PR speaking and dismissed it because Jason said he spoke to his people and they said they didn't vote.

 

My only point is, Jason has openly said he doesn't care about being objective or telling a whole story, he is going to tell the story he wants to tell.  If you read his stuff and want to take it all at face value, so be it.  I just think I'd rather read someone that at least wants to report an entire story on something that is controversial.

 

 

[Ghost_MH]

17 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

I can't speak for CDPR but I've worked for several gaming companies and while the hours can be grueling (My time at Riot nearly broke me mentally) gaming companies have some of the best perks/incentives I've experienced professionally. I guess it's how they justify working their employess so hard during crunch time. It's up to the indivdual to decide if these perks are worth it or not, but this narrative that workers at videogame companies are some exploited underclass is laughable bullshit. Anyone who even considers that has never worked an actual  job before where folks have no idea what "comp time" even is. That said, the gaming industry SHOULD unionize. I don't see that happening anytime soon though.

 

I'd agree with that and posit that a company that can nearly break s person mentally shouldn't be allowed to continue. Like, seriously, fuck those people. You never know what someone's personal life is like. They might accept the perks and pay because they have kids or a partner that can't work or parents they take care of our whatever. Maybe they like the extra money, but my main point still stands. Even if people are willfully putting themselves in these situations for the money or art or vision or perks still doesn't mean that anybody should be the weird nerd that white knight for these soulless corporations, no matter how much they might enjoy their games.

[Mercury33]

The fact that there are so

many questions to be answered and contradictions is exactly the problem with JS. A true journalist would have done a MUCH comprehensive story. But instead he always gets enough to warrant a headline and runs with it. He’s basically the NY Post mascarading as the Times. 
 

And no one(at least in here) is white knighting for corporations. But just because a company is a big corporation doesn’t mean they’re always the bad guy or should always be vilified in stories. So when a story comes out that CLEARLY wasn’t telling the whole thing, it’s ok to “take the corporations side” In the interest of wanting full objective reporting. 

[Paperclyp]

2 hours ago, JPDunks4 said:

 

The clip of the Podcast is a female journalist saying she spoke to 15 or so developers at CDPR who told her a different story than what Jason was hearing.  Not just about voting, but about the crunch story in general.

 

People on the internet of course jumped to say that it was all just CDPR's PR speaking and dismissed it because Jason said he spoke to his people and they said they didn't vote.

 

My only point is, Jason has openly said he doesn't care about being objective or telling a whole story, he is going to tell the story he wants to tell.  If you read his stuff and want to take it all at face value, so be it.  I just think I'd rather read someone that at least wants to report an entire story on something that is controversial.

 

 

see if you could direct me to him saying he doesn’t want to be objective or tell the whole story, I’d be more apt to be more skeptical of his reporting. I don’t wanna send you on a scavenger hunt, so don’t go out and search for it by any means, but the way he’s being talked about as a joke and a hack it’s just like... eh I dunno it seems disproportionate to what’s actually happening. 
 

I don’t necessarily take any one bit of reporting at face value and assume there is no other side.  But as a journalist you feel like no story is ever really complete or as fully fleshed out as you’d like it to be. And they all make mistakes.