How healthy is World of Warcraft's future?

[NineSpine]

It wasn't a fucking "PR statement." It was actual Blizzard developers on Twitter explaining why the changes were being made.

But yeah, I guess you're free to pretend you're the purveyor of all things Blizzard because you possess the unique ability to look at shit from the most pointlessly cynical viewpoint imaginable.

Or half a decade of consulting companies on dealing with these sorts of issues (in the Middle East, not the US, to be fair) made me very aware of how these things work.

If I was in the room after everything blew up, making minor changes to the game that showed we were taking sexual impropriety "very, very seriously" would be my first suggestion. And the way I'd advise to identify those things would be to poll the company on the things they find offensive in the game, because even that methodology would play beautifully in court given the accusations against Blizzard.

But I know, mommy can do no wrong, mommy loves you very much, and anyone that says mommy might do something a bit self-interested is highly offensive and confusing.

[Soon-TM]

It wasn't a fucking "PR statement." It was actual Blizzard developers on Twitter explaining why the changes were being made.

But yeah, I guess you're free to pretend you're the purveyor of all things Blizzard because you possess the unique ability to look at shit from the most pointlessly cynical viewpoint imaginable.

Devs going on a silly witch hunt for pixels, instead of, Idk, demanding better salaries and/or work conditions seems as awfully convenient for management as pointless and distracting for workers. Something definitely doesn't add up in those statements.

[Relapses]

Or half a decade of consulting companies on dealing with these sorts of issues (in the Middle East, not the US, to be fair) made me very aware of how these things work.

If I was in the room after everything blew up, making minor changes to the game that showed we were taking sexual impropriety "very, very seriously" would be my first suggestion. And the way I'd advise to identify those things would be to poll the company on the things they find offensive in the game, because even that methodology would play beautifully in court given the accusations against Blizzard.

But I know, mommy can do no wrong, mommy loves you very much, and anyone that says mommy might do something a bit self-interested is highly offensive and confusing.

Brother what the fuck does your random anecdotal experience have to do with this discussion? And further, where on earth did I say anything about "mommy Blizzard"? I merely suggested that you dismissed one obviously ridiculous conspiracy theory with another conspiracy theory. If you don't care to take the people who made the changes' own words for at face value, that's on you. But please don't pretend you have deep seated knowledge of Blizzard's internal workings because you attended a fucking meeting at some indeterminate point in the past.

- - - Updated - - -

Devs going on a silly witch hunt for pixels, instead of, Idk, demanding better salaries and/or work conditions seems as awfully convenient for management as pointless and distracting for workers. Something definitely doesn't add up in those statements.

I'd say Blizzard's developers are a lot more likely to discuss things like changes to the game freely on Twitter while they would very obviously be behind layers of NDAs to discuss changes in salary/work conditions. The fact that you put these two things on the same spectrum says more about your cynical view of Blizzard as a company than it does anything about how the company works internally.

[NineSpine]

Brother what the fuck does your random anecdotal experience have to do with this discussion? And further, where on earth did I say anything about "mommy Blizzard"? I merely suggested that you dismissed one obviously ridiculous conspiracy theory with another conspiracy theory. If you don't care to take the people who made the changes' own words for at face value, that's on you. But please don't pretend you have deep seated knowledge of Blizzard's internal workings because you attended a fucking meeting at some indeterminate point in the past.

Or because I owned and operated a catastrophe consulting firm for five years.

I'd say Blizzard's developers are a lot more likely to discuss things like changes to the game freely on Twitter while they would very obviously be behind layers of NDAs to discuss changes in salary/work conditions. The fact that you put these two things on the same spectrum says more about your cynical view of Blizzard as a company than it does anything about how the company works internally.

This is how *all* big companies work. Activision is not your friend. They aren't your mommy. They don't love you. They exist to make a profit, and they are in crisis recovery mode.

For the average employee, this decision would absolutely look like Blizzard just listening to them. But if you think that legal didn't conceive of this strategy, you are delusional.

[Shadowferal]

Ah yes, Blizzard's crafted PR statement, where they swear on a bible under penalty of law that they are telling the truth.
Get real. It's a move to protect themselves legally. Anyone who is being honest knows it.

Hmf... I don't believe this was to protect themselves legally, as there wasn't anything in-game illegal.

It's to calm down stock holders who might be feeling antsy over any potential scrutiny.

[Relapses]

Or because I owned and operated a catastrophe consulting firm for five years.

And? Are you currently representing Blizzard? Or are you just some random internet nobody attempting to make their invalid conspiracy theory seem more relevant?

This is how *all* big companies work. Activision is not your friend. They aren't your mommy. They don't love you. They exist to make a profit, and they are in crisis recovery mode.

For the average employee, this decision would absolutely look like Blizzard just listening to them. But if you think that legal didn't conceive of this strategy, you are delusional.

Once again, who the fuck is saying anything about Activision being my friend? You're pretending like you have insider knowledge of a situation and I'm merely pointing out that we already have firsthand accounts from the people making the changes.

[NineSpine]

Hmf... I don't believe this was to protect themselves legally, as there wasn't anything in-game illegal.

It's to calm down stock holders who might be feeling antsy over any potential scrutiny.

100% that it is also to calm stock holders. I should have added that in my initial assessment.

But the way these laws that they are under fire for work is that they will face massive fines if they don't demonstrate good faith attempts to change their culture. This is clearly an attempt to demonstrate that in a non-disruptive way.

- - - Updated - - -

And? Are you currently representing Blizzard? Or are you just some random internet nobody attempting to make their invalid conspiracy theory seem more relevant?




Once again, who the fuck is saying anything about Activision being my friend? You're pretending like you have insider knowledge of a situation and I'm merely pointing out that we already have firsthand accounts from the people making the changes.

I'm just using logic and reason. I don't need data to show me that dogs are more common pets than zebras in the US. I can make that assessment using my mental faculties, and if you bothered to tap into your own you would agree with me.

[Relapses]

I'm just using logic and reason. I don't need data to show me that dogs are more common pets than zebras in the US. I can make that assessment using my mental faculties, and if you bothered to tap into your own you would agree with me.

Buddy, I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm telling you that you have no way to prove anything that you're saying; therefore, imo, it's a fucking conspiracy theory.

[NineSpine]

Buddy, I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm telling you that you have no way to prove anything that you're saying; therefore, imo, it's a fucking conspiracy theory.

That's not what conspiracy theory means. This is what the definition of conspiracy theory is: "belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event."

That has nothing to do with anything I am saying. A conspiracy theory is not "Anything that hurts my feelings and makes mommy look bad".

[Orby]

Even though I left back in January I think WoW can survive with its money grabbing practices and the faithfulness of whales that support it. I don't see Maintenance mode, but WoW has been in 'wing it' mode for a while now. It will continue to make money regardless on the lack of quality of contenty. :P

[Relapses]

That's not what conspiracy theory means. This is what the definition of conspiracy theory is: "belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for a circumstance or event."

That has nothing to do with anything I am saying. A conspiracy theory is not "Anything that hurts my feelings and makes mommy look bad".

You're suggesting that the changes which have reasonable explanations from the people making the changes aren't because of the plainly stated reasons we already know but rather because "legal" told them to do it so they can use it as evidence in court proceedings. You have no way to prove the latter so excuse the fuck out of me for relying on the information we already know instead of pretending my experience in a similar field provides me with insight.

(FWIW, I do think it'd be cute to see somebody use "Exhibit A: We changed a painting to a bowl of fruit," in a court of law but I doubt we'd ever be privy to such a hilarious turn of events.)

[NineSpine]

You're suggesting that the changes which have reasonable explanations from the people making the changes aren't because of the plainly stated reasons we already know but rather because "legal" told them to do it so they can use it as evidence in court proceedings. You have no way to prove the latter so excuse the fuck out of me for relying on the information we already know instead of pretending my experience in a similar field provides me with insight.

(FWIW, I do think it'd be cute to see somebody use "Exhibit A: We changed a painting to a bowl of fruit," in a court of law but I doubt we'd ever be privy to such a hilarious turn of events.)

The reasonable explanation is "We need to reassure shareholders and California's regulators". That's not just a reasonable explanation; it is the ONLY explanation.

Blizzard reached a settlement with the federal government that SPECIFICALLY STATES that the settlement is contingent on them changing their culture. One of the first things they did after reaching that settlement was begin purging the game of potentially offensive material. You want to believe that this is all a GIIIIAAAAANT coincidence and there is no way the two have anything to do with each other. Please.

[Kralljin]

It's to calm down stock holders who might be feeling antsy over any potential scrutiny.

No, it's calm the waves internally, that's my bet.

The devs have said on Twitter, that this is coming from them, i have no reason to believe that the devs would make changes to appease shareholders to feign the image of "everything being good".
Shareholders won't boot the employees, they'll boot the executives.

If any execs would show up right now and demand changes made to the game in order to "appease" shareholders, let alone a goverment agency out to punish the organization for treating the employees like shit, you'd have this leaked almost instantly with a huge shitstorm following.
The execs would basically ask the devs to changes against their own interests, because the shareholders going easier on this issue is better for the executives, not the employees.

Those are elements that have bothered certain developers for a long time and now they're in a position to act without impunity, because anyone internally defending the "Status quo" can be shot down easily.
If the leadership had said "no, we'll not change the game because of this", you'd have certain developers be very pissed because they quite likely see a connection between those elements and the "previous" company culture.

[Relapses]

The reasonable explanation is "We need to reassure shareholders and California's regulators". That's not just a reasonable explanation; it is the ONLY explanation.

Blizzard reached a settlement with the federal government that SPECIFICALLY STATES that the settlement is contingent on them changing their culture. One of the first things they did after reaching that settlement was begin purging the game of potentially offensive material. You want to believe that this is all a GIIIIAAAAANT coincidence and there is no way the two have anything to do with each other. Please.

Yeah dude. It's totally unreasonable to think that the current team of human beings creating the video game might have their own values and comfort zones which are incongruous with the values of previous teams who developed the same game. (Previous teams who, as we now know, were less than scrupulous in their approach.) Things can't change because they help the people making the game simply feel more comfortable. Nah, it's corporate sending out a memo to all the developers telling them they better change or else. They've got shareholders to please! Think of the shareholders!

Sorry dude, I just don't buy the cynicism.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Devs going on a silly witch hunt for pixels, instead of, Idk, demanding better salaries and/or work conditions seems as awfully convenient for management as pointless and distracting for workers. Something definitely doesn't add up in those statements.

Pretty much every dev speaking about this stuff is also demanding those things and more, it’s not an either or situation.

[NineSpine]

Yeah dude. It's totally unreasonable to think that the current team of human beings creating the video game might have their own values and comfort zones which are incongruous with the values of previous teams who developed the same game. (Previous teams who, as we now know, were less than scrupulous in their approach.) Things can't change because they help the people making the game simply feel more comfortable. Nah, it's corporate sending out a memo to all the developers telling them they better change or else. They've got shareholders to please! Think of the shareholders!

Sorry dude, I just don't buy the cynicism.

Blizzard made a legally binding commitment, violation of which would subject them to tens of millions of dollars in fines, to make changes to their culture.

They did this TWO DAYS before the "The Evolution of Creative Content in World of Warcraft" post.

You want to believe these things are disconnected and accuse people of making up "conspiracy theories", and it's pretty clear that you know you are wrong because now the straw men are coming out. I never said there was a memo telling developers to change things. You are just making things up because you are too arrogant to admit you look foolish. How about you engage with what I said happened, rather than what is convenient for your ego?

[Relapses]

Blizzard made a legally binding commitment, violation of which would subject them to tens of millions of dollars in fines, to make changes to their culture.

They did this TWO DAYS before the "The Evolution of Creative Content in World of Warcraft" post.

You want to believe these things are disconnected and accuse people of making up "conspiracy theories", and it's pretty clear that you know you are wrong because now the straw men are coming out. I never said there was a memo telling developers to change things. You are just making things up because you are too arrogant to admit you look foolish. How about you engage with what I said happened, rather than what is convenient for your ego?

We were datamining changes weeks before the official statement so this isn't the smoking gun you seem to think it is. Also, I find it quaintly ironic that you're accusing me of a strawman because I said corporate instead of legal (as if that matters) while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge the actual argument* I'm making. But you keep doing you my dude.

*for the record, it's not an argument. It's just a statement of plainly available facts.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Blizzard made a legally binding commitment, violation of which would subject them to tens of millions of dollars in fines, to make changes to their culture.

They did this TWO DAYS before the "The Evolution of Creative Content in World of Warcraft" post.

You want to believe these things are disconnected and accuse people of making up "conspiracy theories", and it's pretty clear that you know you are wrong because now the straw men are coming out. I never said there was a memo telling developers to change things. You are just making things up because you are too arrogant to admit you look foolish. How about you engage with what I said happened, rather than what is convenient for your ego?

The changes had been ongoing weeks before that blue post or the settlement, the only reason the blue post was even a thing is because people were making a fuss about it.

[Soon-TM]

If the leadership had said "no, we'll not change the game because of this", you'd have certain developers be very pissed because they quite likely see a connection between those elements and the "previous" company culture.

This. I have to admit that it is a quite smart strategy, from a management's PoV: you let the workers vent some frustration off via an imaginary social justice crusade, which in turn leaves almost everything else unchanged. Especially, especially the no-unionising part, which I'd wager it was the main reason for hiring a firm with a well earned union-busting reputation such as Wilmer Hale.

- - - Updated - - -

Pretty much every dev speaking about this stuff is also demanding those things and more, it’s not an either or situation.

Idk, the unionization requests seem to be ranking far lower than the quasi-Puritan endeavors going on.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Idk, the unionization requests seem to be ranking far lower than the quasi-Puritan endeavors going on.

Have you actually gone through some dev twitters? There are like 5 or so who have commented on the devs wanting this change while seemingly every single dev is pushing the better Aviblz stuff.

By no possible metric could you say it’s ranking lower.