Single Status Update
So apparently, the whole "Amy Hennig was forced out of Naughty Dog" thing was bullshit made up by 2 IGN editors, forcing one of them to have his name on the article, and when Sony refuted it, just left the guy to take the backlash.
Naughty Dog already have mounds of evidence to prove they’re a shitty work environment, why the hell would you make something up? That only gives Sony and ND fuel to discredit ALL the accusations and Sony fanboys now can feel vindicated in their belief the criticisms against them are made up simply to slander.
Then again, kinda telling that this is what most news outlets and journalists will even cover when on this subject. When allegations are confirmed false.
I mean, it's more important to highlight the IGN editors' shitty, manipulative behaviour than it is to be concerned that you don't have more ammo to shit on Naughty Dog.
ND have enough problems to justify hating them. We don't need to add falsehoods into the mix just to help that justification.
@Tracker_TD “I mean, it's more important to highlight the IGN editors' shitty, manipulative behaviour than it is to be concerned that you don't have more ammo to shit on Naughty Dog.”
“ND have enough problems to justify hating them.”
and those problems ever rarely get covered by most news outlets. Unless to confirm them false to bolster a companies reputation to the mainstream to garner sympathy for them.
it’s important to cover false allegations yes, but it’s ALSO important for these supposed honest game journalists that want to cover the truth, to also hold companies accountable for their shit when revealed. Which many of them don’t. It’s usually fluff pieces to soften the blow towards a companies publicity or articles like this, that allow companies to continue to hype up their fanbases because they can now scapegoat and pull a “people are lying about us, you shouldn’t trust these stories coming out” card because there’s now evidence that there has been disingenuous journalists that have poisoned the water supply. The narrative can now be turned around to suggesting this is a bigger deal than the excessive toxic working conditions, especially if more news outlets end up covering this and making a fuss about it vs how silent a lot of them were regarding the crunch allegations
So what, the writer in question should've just stayed silent about his treatment by IGN's blatantly shitty top brass, so that you don't have to deal with Sony fanboys doing the kind of shit they'd do anyway? Give me a break.
Those problems do get covered in outlets, it's just the Sony fanboys also don't care.
Lol you really didn’t read my post at all. Please tell me where I said he should have stayed silent, because last I checked *checks* one of the first things I said was
”it’s important to cover false allegations yes,”
wanna keep being disingenuous to peddle this narrative I’m being unfair to information being released because of my hate boner for ND?
“but it’s ALSO important for these supposed honest game journalists that want to cover the truth, to also hold companies accountable for their shit when revealed. ”
literally what I said after I said it’s important to cover false allegations. Is this not true? Should journalists NOT cover both stories and hold a company accountable?
Cause, iirc last year Rockstar had toxic work conditions revealed about them (not just crunch) including how corrupt upper management was, to the point they’d get verbally abused if the boss found out they invited someone not in their inner circle to shady strip club parties, and no one picked up on those stories, or pressed the company when interviewing them.
Actually, here’s a good sum up of that bullshit
Same with EA and Activision. Mainstream game news outlets like IGN or Gamespot may briefly cover this shit, but they don’t keep pushing on it, hell in interviews, they ever rarely bring the stuff up if ever to the CEO’s face, and instead just basically allow it to be a giant fluff piece or way for a company to say nice sounding shit that makes them look like a company that is just misunderstood
and oh, look at that, none of those companies I listed are Sony exclusive. Weird
Your priority here is pretty clearly shitting on Naughty Dog. I get it, they suck. But your initial response to this should've been "damn, it sucks that the writer was used as a scapegoat by his abusive and manipulative peers" and left at that, rather than needing to dive back into the "b-but, Naughty Dog bad!!" whinging.
We know Naughty Dog's working conditions are shit. Anybody that doesn't at this point is just being wilfully ignorant, and increased coverage of the working conditions probably won't change that; they don't want to believe it because they've hinged their personality around going to bat for a video game system and its games. This is ignoring that, as I said, multiple sites did cover the crunch situation.
“Mainstream game news outlets like IGN or Gamespot may briefly cover this shit, but they don’t keep pushing on it, hell in interviews, they ever rarely bring the stuff up if ever to the CEO’s face, and instead just basically allow it to be a giant fluff piece or way for a company to say nice sounding shit that makes them look like a company that is just misunderstood ”
simply “covering“ it is not enough, when these same sites won’t when given interviews with developers and CEO’s press companies or openly criticize them when given the opportunities to make said CEO’s uncomfortable. (Look at most EA interviews)
Again, this isn’t just a ND dog thing, drop the tunnel vision. Why do you think I brought up Rockstar, or EA, or Activision? It’s a general news coverage in gaming thing. Cause lots of people cover these allegations briefly, but then drop it soon after news of something in their game is revealed. CD Projekt red is a relevant example of this. People covered the crunch very briefly, but then jumped to discussing the delays of the game, and are now mostly talking about the fact fucking testicle hairs can be made different colors. They don’t push on it, it’s a brief story to them no different than any other topic about the company.
Again, expose false allegations, that’s important, but don’t just ignore the wider problem in the process, or briefly cover it cause it’s currently topical, but then go back to mostly being a extension of a companies marketing a week or two after. THATS I think more damning an example of ones priorities.
My point is that now isn't the time to bitch about it. Imagine coming forward about abuse at the hands of other employees, and someone's main takeaway (don't beat around the bush, it was absolutely your main takeaway) is "b-but the game companies are evil! That's the more important thing here!" Game companies being evil may be the case, sure, but there's a time and a place. This isn't a story about Naughty Dog, or game crunch in general; it's a story about abuse of power within video game journalism. The whataboutism doesn't work.
At the end of the day, a lot of the crunch stories were also proprietary research by Schrierer; there's only so much other pubs can do with that beyond re-printing what Schrierer wrote. Could they go out and do their own proprietary research pieces? Sure, but that hinges on people coming forward, and Kotaku basically has a monopoly on these stories now because they seem to have good protections in place for those who come forward, and are trusted with it as such.Quote
and are now mostly talking about the fact fucking testicle hairs can be made different colors.
I would be very surprised if video game outlets were not discussing upcoming video game features, no matter how absurd said features sound.
“My point is that now isn't the time to bitch about it.”
Id argue it’s always the time to bring up a company that’s continuing even now crunch culture/abuse. It’s not a competition, both are shitty things
“Imagine coming forward about abuse at the hands of other employees, and someone's main takeaway (don't beat around the bush, it was absolutely your main takeaway) is "b-but the game companies are evil! That's the more important thing here!”
Its more, “game companies are also still abusing their staff” like I said, you can bring up multiple shitty things.
”At the end of the day, a lot of the crunch stories were also proprietary research by Schrierer; there's only so much other pubs can do with that beyond re-printing what Schrierer wrote.”
they can put the CEO’s when interviewed in hot water, ask them questions, and make them uncomfortable when trying to defend themselves instead of just doing what IGN does when interviewing Bobby Kotick, Strauss Zelnick, or Randy Pitchford and just ask fluff questions and let them control the interview. They shouldn’t be so thirsty to jump into bed with these companies and keep them happy imo. Don’t be looked at as an extension of their marketing department
heck, If it were me, even if I’m writing articles on a new detail about a upcoming game, I’d slip in continuously in each of the articles in some fashion the crunch and abuse allegations or reference it when mentioning the companies name. There are still ways to keep at it.
Its more, “game companies are also still abusing their staff” like I said, you can bring up multiple shitty things.
Yes, but it's fairly irrelevant here. Like I said, this is a story about the abuse of power within video game journalism. You're using whataboutism to whine about Naughty Dog again. To be frank, it's idiotic. Nobody's just magically forgetting that these companies have shit working culture unless they want to, because again they've hinged their personality around batting for Playstation; but it's not the focus of what was posted here, and it doesn't have to be just because ND got so much as mentioned.
Someone has bravely come forward about being abused within a publication; my response to that isn't "well that sucks, but this other company is also bad!!" It's "that's really bad and I hope there are consequences for their actions now it's come to light." It's that easy! Your response is effectively the former, immediately diverting attention from what they've done because you hate Naughty Dog (or CDPR or whoever) more than you care about the employee who suffered the abuse here.
I hate these companies and their culture of crunch too! But this isn't the place to bring it up. You can "bring up multiple shitty things", but this isn't a good place to do that. The only tie here is that Naughty Dog got mentioned in the false story, but that's a fairly weak means of segwaying into "oh no, now that this person came forward about abuse I've got to listen to the Sony fanboys moaning again" or whatever.
“Nobody's just magically forgetting that these companies have shit working culture unless they want to, because again they've hinged their personality around batting for Playstation”
see my rockstar example. People do forget or choose to not cover certain stories on this subject.
“Someone has bravely come forward about being abused within a publication; my response to that isn't "well that sucks, but this other company is also bad!!"
These events don’t happen in vacuums. This IS shitty abuse, and there should be consequences. However, this still regardless is a story about IGN writers making up a story about a ND employee being unfairly treated. And this will going forward make it more difficult for anyone in the journalism business to cover stories of abuse and crunch because there is this story of a massive games coverage site making shit up about unfair working conditions. Skepticism and doubt will be things more take into account of any allegations because we have here plain as day, a news site clearly lying to get clicks. It’s a factor and reality that can’t be avoided, and can be brought up as a concern, even if how the person in this story was still wronged and treated deserves to be the main point to discuss. “It’s not the time” I personally disagree. I think it can still be acknowledged how this does poison the water supply for journalists and anonymous employees working their asses off to get these stories out there AND still want there to be consequences for these shitheels