Have you ever sat down to consider why it is that EA is so reviled in the gaming world? I mean, it's a reputation that goes beyond the usual perfunctory nonsense that litters that normal chattersphere of the Internet; people despise this company. (And yet gladly buy their games, because intelligent consumer choices are for wusses?) In fact, it runs even deeper than even that! Beyond the consumers, even fellow games companies hate EA and what they stand for, to the point where they get jeered at formal gatherings. (Okay that happened once, but the point was made.) Perhaps it's just the natural order of all things to have a entity that represents all that folk hate in a games company so that an example can be set of what not to do. Or perhaps it's something to do with their vile and conquering policies and practises. Ones that Take Two apparently interpreted as 'how to' models if recent events are to be taken at face value.
There are few habits worse, in my mind, for the game's industry that the cycle of financially crippling a small studio in order to poach their staff. Sure, 'it's classic corporate fair' and all, but that doesn't make it an anyless unforgivable breech of trust not just to the offended party but to an entire industry that relies on collaboration in order to keep going. In a nutshell the act sort of goes like this; some big publisher will come along and strike a deal with a smaller developer, usually one that is already in financial trouble or whom lack the breadth to sufficiently diversify. These publishers bring them aboard, ensure all mark's eggs are in their basket before pulling out the bottom and leaving the developers financially broken. Then whilst they are in that vulnerable state it's simple to swoop in and 'save' the soon-to-be jobless staff. Is that a dramatisation? Sure. But I feel it hits all the salient points adequately enough for you to pick up roughly what I'm putting down.
As much as I hate to deploy a word which I think is criminally overused, especially in the gaming punditry world, there is no better adjective to describe this type of behaviour than 'Predatory', for that's exactly what it is. These people abuse their size and power to hunt and obliterate others, not exactly the shining example that this industry needs. With that in mind it's a wonder why Take Two, of all companies, thought it wise to do exactly that not too long ago against Star Theory Games; except it's not a wonder, because this is exactly what these sorts of people do on the daily. Most times the studio in question disappears without a hitch and everyone's none the wiser until years after the fact; that is almost the case here except this debacle played out at the beginning of this year, and yet it's hitting the gaming news cycle already. (Whoops.)
News broke last week thanks to the work of a reporter from Bloomberg, of all publications, that goes by the name of Jason Schi- oh. (You know, when he left Kotaku I thought that would force the gaming media to promote someone new to being a real journalist, but it seems they're still relying on Jason.) His sources uncovered this troubling story in great detail that you can read about for yourself, but here's the rub. In 2011 there was this little game called Kerbal Space Program which started out as an indie darling and ballooned into what can be fairly labelled a cult classic. After an actual publisher had got their mittens on it, Take Two demanded a sequel and commissioned it to the care of Star Theory Games, a small developer who have, as far as I can tell, never made anything that I'd be interested in. You can probably deduce the rest of the story from there.
The part of the story that really caught off-guard, however, was when the call for the Kerbal Space Program 2 program to be cancelled was apparently declared over Linkedin, with the offer to take a job at Take-Two either contained in the same message or sent shortly afterwards. Now this could be creative licence on the author's part or just a plain misread on my own, but if this situation did indeed play out like that then there's a special level of insulting disrespect here. Moving past how inappropriate it is to announce important updates regarding company-effecting projects over Linkedin, the fact that the job offers were made not too long after, (As though Take Two had just hit the company and gone all 'omae wa mou shindeiru' on their ass) speaks off off a particularly slimy and premeditated move on their part which screwed over so many 'little folk'. It makes me mad, I'll admit that much.
Of course, this whole situation has resulted in the steady death of the company who once held such a promising project in their grasp, both due to the financial attack and the loss of two thirds of their staff. And lest you believe Take-Two's vacuous excuse about how this game 'did not fit their current business models' or some such nonsense, rest assured that the company have come out to declare that they will be continuing development on Kerbal Space Program 2, so this was most definitely an organised assault since the moment go. Now the only question left at the end of the day is what, as folk who care about the industry and the folk that get regularly abused in such manners, can we do about it? And the answer is, more often than not, absolutely nothing at all.
As I hinted earlier, this is the sort of behaviour that runs rampant across the video game industry and most of the times it doesn't even get reported on, let alone people care enough to want to respond to it. If the consumers can't even organise enough to punish 2K for their embarrassing lack of effort on their flagship sports titles, then what could they ever manage to do on behalf of a bunch of faceless developers that have no direct effect on them? So is this the fate of the game's industry? This vampiric, feudal relationship where futures are uncertain and everyone wants to step on their supposed colleagues? Perhaps so.
But I'm crying to the wind, I suppose. This sort of behaviour will never go away, not within a world shaped and defined by it. That doesn't mean I have to like it, but I suppose as we hear more and more it's only natural that a certain veil of desensitisation descends on us all. Should it? Maybe, maybe not; perhaps through acknowledgement and steady condemnation of such actions some small merit may be earned, afterall, folk now know not to trust EA even slightly due to similar actions, but then what is the alternative? For a small company looking to break into the AAA industry, there seems to be precious little choice that doesn't come alongside dancing on the knife's edge. Perhaps that's just the price of opportunity and I'm just another clueless rube getting vexed over nothing at all. (More than likely, I'd say.)
No comments:
Post a Comment