-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
You are the CEO of a major AAA publisher. Your game(s) offend dictatorships that represent a big market share. Do you apologize?
- Thread starter fireflame
- Start date
Most businesses try and stay as politically neutral as they can because they want to sell to all sides.
I aplogize and promise to do better, "no more politics" I claim on the press release, then immediately greenlight a sequel in which we double down.
Is my option to censor possible for the market that is offended? It's not like editing a game to fit the mold of the market is unheard of but it also depends on if this
1) affects future endeavors
2) affects jobs
3) isn't a huge undertaking to do (change blood to green or something like MK in Japan)
1) affects future endeavors
2) affects jobs
3) isn't a huge undertaking to do (change blood to green or something like MK in Japan)
It depends on what needs to be changed. If it's something dumb like the Xi Jinping's hatred of Winnie The Pooh then sure, I'd change it. Ultimately nothing of real value is being lost. If it's something major like a country's issues with PoC, LGTBQ community, or women then nah I'd tell them to fuck off. Some shit is definitely worth losing your job for and, as a CEO, I'd probably have a decent amount of "Fuck you" money so the decision would be pretty easy.
Context is everything but as a general rule I'd say no and keep making things like it. I'd rather fail doing what I want to do than succeed doing what someone else tells me (in creative fields)
The sheer amount of PR generated would offset any financial losses, especially if the dictatorship has a weak currency and the population has low buying power, which tends to be true.
I double down.
I double down.
Depends on what offends them: skeletons are a problem? Tadaaa, they are zombies now!
The problem is the protagonist is a woman or a minority? Fuck you man, that shit's basic for the story.
They haye certain symbolism (swastikas, confederate flags, winnie the pooh)? Well, I'm afraid you'll just eat shit.
Probably wouldn't last as CEO
The problem is the protagonist is a woman or a minority? Fuck you man, that shit's basic for the story.
They haye certain symbolism (swastikas, confederate flags, winnie the pooh)? Well, I'm afraid you'll just eat shit.
Probably wouldn't last as CEO
This question is non-sensical.
If your AAA game is targeting a market that exists under a dictatorship, you should be taking those potential offense points into account well before the game is announced, much less released in a state that offends that dictatorship. So, in other words, if you end up in this scenario you're already incompetent at your job.
In a case where the games were already released and successful in other markets and you're weighing whether or not to comply with a region's sensibilities, then it's a simple matter of the cost to comply (which includes intangibles like potential damage to brand) vs expected revenue.
If your AAA game is targeting a market that exists under a dictatorship, you should be taking those potential offense points into account well before the game is announced, much less released in a state that offends that dictatorship. So, in other words, if you end up in this scenario you're already incompetent at your job.
In a case where the games were already released and successful in other markets and you're weighing whether or not to comply with a region's sensibilities, then it's a simple matter of the cost to comply (which includes intangibles like potential damage to brand) vs expected revenue.
I wouldn't apologize but prior to that be careful not to impose my western values over everything and everyone, I'd also be careful not to portray imperialistic or overly missionaric meanings. I'm a trained Chinese Studies scholar and being able to understand things deeply first before having a position on it yet knowing there's always some bias involved is the bread and butter of our discipline. You can and should have a stance, but an informed one. Obviously, I don't think being overly political is a good idea in games simply as there are few things dividing people more than politics. I'd never allow to have overly conservative or shitty things in my game in the first place. That all being said, unfortunately, people who become CEOs are usually not humanists. Even if they support sanctions like against Russia in some cases, they usually have no backbones and tend to avoid confrontative statements with especially with large but nationalistic markets like China. I'd absolutely expect them to buckle down for cash.
Absolutely not, and I would be out of the job pretty quickly. Shareholders give no shits about principles.
I'd pick option 3 for sure. I am not gonna potentially endanger the jobs of my workers just because I'm stubborn over a shitty joke. Besides, if this supposed dictatorship has such a huge market share, the company I'm CEO of would probably already be pandering to them in the first place or else you wouldn't have that huge market share. Offending them all of a sudden makes no sense unless it's just a random ass joke.
As long as the games don't promote negative animosity towards groups based on found less mentalities (racism, sexism, jingoism, etc), then I don't change them.
Artistic expression is fine, but I would not opt to host a game, regardless of it's popularity, that celebrates marginalizing people for the sake of political grandstanding.
I'm not surprised at people taking the "Got rich, fuck you, got mine" mentality. It's more common here than people let on.
"Why don't we tax the rich?"
"Because I still want to be rich one day".
Artistic expression is fine, but I would not opt to host a game, regardless of it's popularity, that celebrates marginalizing people for the sake of political grandstanding.
I'm not surprised at people taking the "Got rich, fuck you, got mine" mentality. It's more common here than people let on.
"Why don't we tax the rich?"
"Because I still want to be rich one day".
If I was Boss of a major gaming company, I wouldn't care about shareholders cause I wouldn't make the company public in the first place. If a dictator is offended by my game, I would respond with "I am sorry you are not interested in purchasing this game, perhaps you see something to buy in our back catalog. We strive to keep the artistic vision intact of our (partner) developers, and pride ourselves of not promoting/festering terrorism, and preventing our players from bankrupting themselves. More games are added every year, so check back often!".
a fun story for me. My country ban tropico 5 (not 6) for that reason and company response with a new mission about my country lol.
You don't become a CEO of a large gaming company without being a person who would immediately go for option 3.
If, by some dark miracle, you are not such a person, you will be immediately replaced with somebody who is the second your principles harm the bottom line.
How does a video game publisher become a major AAA publisher on only private investments?
Well the assumption by most of those, myself included is that it is a publicly listed company; if the question was phrased otherwise I'm sure the answers would be skewed differently too; mine would. If it was my company and I would be the one taking the financial hit, then I'd refuse to change the game, expect it to be banned and likely not release titles in that territory again.
Probably C, thinking that there are gamers in that region that want the game, I would not to rob those people of the possibility to play it.
Given what happened with Devotion, it doesn't seem as if censoring the game and apologizing is even going to help, so why not double down at that point?
If you want be a successful CEO you have to choose the third option. Go full sociopath or just don't become a CEO.