Game Workers Unite wants Activision Blizzard to fire its CEO

[Mardux]

I can't figure out why the other members on the B of D aren't held accountable by the "community", but Kotick is the antichrist of Acti-blizz.

[Lochton]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...174215488.html

What's your guys opinion on this?

Personally...
I really hate Activision Blizzard and what they did with WoW and all my favorite games.

Layoffs suck and I know they happen especially in the video game industry but I will definetly remember this next time they release a game.
Ive already begun my boycott with Blizz and unsub'd 2 months ago from a recurring sub since 2005.
I know I dont effect much but it makes me feel better that I'm not supporting this shit company anymore that is known to take advantage of it employees with their "dream job"...

I guess with these layoffs their stocks increased with investors and as sad as it is... this whole thing probably wont effect them but I do hope and pray that they lose everything.

Sorry but that isn't how business works, sadly..

[rhorle]

That's what I want to know too!!!!!!

Vivendi bought Activision and merged it into Vivendi games. Blizzard was a division of Vivendi games. They took the Blizzard name because of the brand power of the name and it was the only one not rolled into Activsion (or closed). Blizzard has always been owned by a parent company. They have always had that proverbial "nanny".

[Freshouttajail]

Technically correct but it seems you dont consider that the people who make the game are not necessarily the people calling the shots.
What im trying to say is: people have limited options of how to do their work

It's not just about calling shots. Technically, calling the shots to have a new feature that represents war where lots of people participate in a siege sounds like a good idea for BfA. It is a good idea. It was poorly executed. The people who made this poorly are not the creative director, the guy will review content feature and give his feedback but if the devs ONLY make bad stuff then they reach a point where they have to decide if they cut the feature or go on with it as it is.

Now, did Blizzard have a different goal for warfront? Did they make exactly what they wanted and they're just really disconnected from what the playerbase want or did they end up with something completely off target because of either lack of talent or lack of time? We will probably only know during some GDC talk in 10 years, for now we can only speculate.
While the creative director has an eye on everything and technically has the last word, a lot of stuff remains somewhat in control, or at least that's how it goes where I work. He can say "yes", "no", but in the end it's other people who actually make the content. And the CEO really doesn't say much about the creative process, so that guy who got 15mil, even if he gets fired and nothing changes in the dev team, then the next xpack will be just as bad. The CEO never said "I want shitty armor with retarded requirements, with boring ass islands and shitty non-pvp-fake-fight-siege-battle". It seems like a lot of people on this forum think that, it's just ignorant.

[Nasuuna]

Im still trying to figure out why Blizzard ever joined with Activision anyway. They had no problem self publishing their games. They didnt get any developers from Activision. They dont get a share of Activision's profits and likely pay Activiaion some of theirs. All they got was a nanny telling them what to do

a company bought both activision and blizzard and merged them

[shadowmatrix]

Im still trying to figure out why Blizzard ever joined with Activision anyway. They had no problem self publishing their games. They didnt get any developers from Activision. They dont get a share of Activision's profits and likely pay Activiaion some of theirs. All they got was a nanny telling them what to do

I don't know, maybe so they could get away from Vivendi. It isn't hard to find these things out if you really want to know.

As for the main topic, just a small group trying to make a name by going after a target nobody expects them to beat. When they have to back away everyone will feel sorry for them.

[rhorle]

Well lets put it this way if Blizz was not attached to Actidemon then I could have seen Mike Morhaime do a Iwata (Nintendo CEO) and slashed his own salary to make sure there were no layoffs at the company.
But since they have Kotick in charge and despite record profits all suits get a bonus and 800 folks get fired.

And yet when Mike had to fire way more then 800 people from Blizzard (remember the 800 is ATVI wide) he didn't slash his salary to save their jobs. People need to stop romanticizing people and companies. People need to start learning about how companies are run if they want to really discuss things like this or try to get things changed.

[Pooti]

Im still trying to figure out why Blizzard ever joined with Activision anyway. They had no problem self publishing their games. They didnt get any developers from Activision. They dont get a share of Activision's profits and likely pay Activiaion some of theirs. All they got was a nanny telling them what to do

I do not think they joined. Blizzard was a subsidiary of Vivendi for years. Activision bought out Vivendi. That is the abridged version.

[Sunblaze]

Companies should be able to fire whoever they please as long as they don't do anything illegal (ie not paying whatever needs to be paid).

[EkyuGames]

Morality clauses haven't traditionally been in business's best interest. That being said, if the US were to suspend it's laws for a day, I'd shatter this guy's jaw right in front of his family if only to serve the function that his ego basically brings nothing of value to society. That being said, it's hard as a functioning adult to ever really condone violence outside of fantasy. It does beg the obvious question though--Why is violence even in the conversation of valuable alternatives to how you're behaving Bobby? Perhaps just pondering that one. "Why is it that someone beating my ass would do the world a lot of good?" It's interesting that the notion is compelling enough in that regard. Anywho.

Not sure how I feel about the movement as a whole. On the one hand-- Companies can lay off whomever they want. On the other hand, he's a complete piece of shit, and it's very very important that he goes to bed and understands that reality.

[The Stormbringer]

He could always prove himself by being like Satoru Iwata.



He took responsibility for the failures of his company and had his own, personal pay cut in order to preserve jobs.

[Soon-TM]

What I find extremely irksome is when ppl are fired after the company announces record profits. It comes that you can be laid off because the company isn't doing fine, because it is, or "just in case" aka "to bolster inverstors' confidence". It's the scummiest version of capitalism ever.

[rhorle]

He could always prove himself by being like Satoru Iwata.

A pay cut would not stop redundant jobs from being redundant. These people were not laid off due to financial issues.

- - - Updated - - -

What I find extremely irksome is when ppl are fired after the company announces record profits. It comes that you can be laid off because the company isn't doing fine, because it is, or "just in case" aka "to bolster inverstors' confidence". It's the scummiest version of capitalism ever.

A company can find out that they have 10 plumbers to unclog 1 toliet no matter how much money they are making. They just lost Destiny. There already are a bunch of jobs that no longer have a purpose because of that. Executives have been shuffled around or replaced. Restructuring has nothing to do with capitalism, profits, or anything money wise. They can and should happen all the time.

[Sunblaze]

What I find extremely irksome is when ppl are fired after the company announces record profits. It comes that you can be laid off because the company isn't doing fine, because it is, or "just in case" aka "to bolster inverstors' confidence". It's the scummiest version of capitalism ever.

You shouldnt be forced to give employment to a group of people. If you dont need or want this group of people you will fire them.
I'd argue against the company if they didnt pay the layoffs or they had debt with employees but i think its not the case.

[Justpassing]

Yeah, good luck with that.

[Pooti]

I bet he could take no pay, and it would not fill in for the wages, benefits etc of 800 employees. I will say though, that he did his job. He was hired by the board to make choices that keep the company in the black. The decisions he makes is to keep the company running. There is an argument to be made that maybe, 92% of the company still have jobs because of his choice.

[Zabatakis]

Honestly; who cares. Go get another job; Layoffs happen all the time.

It is more about why it happened. Since they posted profits beyond the highest ever to that point, its seen as a mindfuck ala ancient Roman decimation. Layoff/kill 10% of your people so the remaining work 2x as hard hoping to not get canned/killed next. From a company like Activision known for all sorts of psychology shenanigans its just tough to swallow.

[Tiny Dancer]

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/...174215488.html

What's your guys opinion on this?

Personally...
I really hate Activision Blizzard and what they did with WoW and all my favorite games.

Layoffs suck and I know they happen especially in the video game industry but I will definetly remember this next time they release a game.
Ive already begun my boycott with Blizz and unsub'd 2 months ago from a recurring sub since 2005.
I know I dont effect much but it makes me feel better that I'm not supporting this shit company anymore that is known to take advantage of it employees with their "dream job"...

I guess with these layoffs their stocks increased with investors and as sad as it is... this whole thing probably wont effect them but I do hope and pray that they lose everything.

They have every right to fire whoever they want to fire. Who are these people thinking they have any say in what a company does? Why would they fire a CEO that makes them tons of money? Why should they keep employing people that have no value to the company. And if they did have any value for the company, why would they fire them?

[Mrbleedinggums]

Well lets put it this way if Blizz was not attached to Actidemon then I could have seen Mike Morhaime do a Iwata (Nintendo CEO) and slashed his own salary to make sure there were no layoffs at the company.
But since they have Kotick in charge and despite record profits all suits get a bonus and 800 folks get fired.

I read a post earlier on Reddit that TB (yeah I know lots didn't like the man, I did however) warned us that Kotick was a bastard and well we all know what happened.

This. This is why we are pissed off. If it happened to be layoffs but the CEOs were taking a hit as well, I can understand. When you do layoffs AND you give your CEOs bonuses? You're basically saying "Hey, if we fire these people we can give ourselves even MORE obscene amounts of money!" That isn't cool and is why we hate them with a passion. Iwata is what every CEO should aspire to be, morality wise. Then again, it is also a cultural thing because the Japanese actually take responsibility for their actions and will apologize if even a minute goes by that they didn't forsee closing down or being late on.

[Sansnom]

Im still trying to figure out why Blizzard ever joined with Activision anyway. They had no problem self publishing their games. They didnt get any developers from Activision. They dont get a share of Activision's profits and likely pay Activiaion some of theirs. All they got was a nanny telling them what to do

They did not have a choice. They were not independent and was part of Vivendi I believe. They could have bought themselves out but that required a lot of money. Like many small companies, they were not big at the very outset and did not remain independent. It happens.