Video Essay: The Hidden Financial Powers Behind Gaming's Culture War

a'la mode

Member
Quickly going through it, it sounds (pardon my French) stupid as fuck. There is no "ESG cabal" out there; ESG and other ratings are just that, ratings to help you guide your investment choice. If you think ESG values apply to you and you want to reflect those morals and values in your investment choices, it's for you. It's the same as if you don't want to buy tobacco, alcohol, and arms companies - just don't. You control the buy button you press. If morals and values don't guide your investment decisions and you just want turbo capitalism, you have ratings that only look at past performance, for example the Morningstar rating. Or don't look at any of the ratings and make your own decisions without any guides, you've read a couple of articles at Motley Fool, you know better.

Similarly, you will have funds and VC that invest money according to their principles. Some may look for "sustainability", some will avoid arms companies, some will go with whatever they think gives the absolute most money.

It's like those idiots who read an article on fractional-reserve banking and think they've stumbled upon some closely guarded secret used to print infinite money.
 
Last edited:

HerjansEagleFeeder

Gold Member
Ah yes, Plutos cave allegory. The bit of philosophy everyone who doesn't know anything about philosophy always cites and puts into contexts where it stops making sense anymore. Not that i'm complaining, i guess this is better than nothing.
 

Loomy

Thinks Microaggressions are Real
TL;DR incoming.

The premise of this video was - at first - interesting, but it's based on a flawed understanding of why these heavy investment in studios/publishers by "outsiders" started in the first place. He also misunderstands the point of DEI initiatives at these companies and - in the Embracer example he presented - the push to have more women executives/leaders at the company.

I won't touch the DEI stuff to not derail the thread.

But when it comes to the funding part he brought up, there are 3 things to point out.

  1. Most stupidly rich people like to be seen as good, benevolent individuals. It's why you have a lot of wealthy people engaged in ESG initiatives. Stupidly rich people also like being stupidly rich. It's why their portfolio have a bunch of shit across a wide sector. Yes, pharma is one of the more lucrative investments you can have.
  2. The reason why those "outsiders" started investing heavily in gaming is because it was a rapidly growing industry. Not only that, it was a rapidly growing industry where the bread and butter were original IPs. IPs that could be licensed to film/TV - a sector that was also rapidly growing thanks to streaming. It is also an industry whose products are tied to users, and hopefully data about those users that can be used to sell more things to them. I don't think I need to explain why that is valuable(and no, it's not so they can sell you Ozempic to lose weight so you think you're more desirable only to find out you're not so they can sell you anti-depressants).
  3. To think that the owner of some hedge fund somewhere is directing studios on one end of their portfolio to make games to piss people off so they can hopefully sell them some newly developed prescription drug from the other end of their portfolio is laughable.

Again, I thought this was going to be an actually interesting look at how publishers encourage discourse to increase engagement and a look at how that directly correlates to dollars spent, but at no point did he explain how the backlash against Veilguard/Concord that led to a lack of spending on those games also resulted in an increase of spending somewhere else.

Also, the reason why employees from a closed studios find themselves at other studios is because games development is a very specialized form of software development and you hire experienced people when possible. Most of the people who worked on Concord at Firewalk are programmers who had nothing to do with the design direction of the game. And the directors still know how to direct a team and get them to deliver on a vision. Just because their last vision didn't click with anyone doesn't mean they're "inept". Imagine if every time a movie or album flopped, the director/producers were blacklisted.

When an animation studio works on a movie and the movie fails, the animators go off to work at other animation studios. If Boeing or Blue Origin's space endeavours go nowhere, their people will be hired at SpaceX or ESA, or somewhere else working on similar projects. People - especially those with specialized skills and training - are a valuable resource. They don't just get "run out of town" or "blacklisted".
 
Last edited:

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
Ah yes, Plutos cave allegory. The bit of philosophy everyone who doesn't know anything about philosophy always cites and puts into contexts where it stops making sense anymore. Not that i'm complaining, i guess this is better than nothing.

I always found funny the attachment ultra conservatives have to Ancient Greece considering they practiced institutionalised pederastia with boys as young as 12.
 

HerjansEagleFeeder

Gold Member
I always found funny the attachment ultra conservatives have to Ancient Greece considering they practiced institutionalised pederastia with boys as young as 12.
Would you say "institutionalised pederastia" is a thing that has ideological implications? Because it would seem you think so if this amuses you. I'd say being a "pedophile" (which i'm not sure if this category applies to what you're referring to here) is not political but of a different domain. I also have a hard time understanding how, if say todays conservatives find something valuable or noteworthy in a long gone era or civilization, how they're obligated to agree with literally every single thing within or associated with it? Can't you say something about a thing is good, while another thing about it isn't? Is it always everything or nothing? Is there room for nuanced verdicts about cultures and such?
 

Pandawan

Banned
Click link. See mustache. Close video. Call OP a random slur. Close thread. Go to bed feeling sad.
Season 6 Goodbye GIF by Better Call Saul
 

Pandawan

Banned
The author points out the links between ESG measurement organizations (such as MSCI and Sustainalytics) and large financial institutions investing in pharmaceutical companies. The connection is highlighted between investments in games promoting DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) and investments in pharmaceuticals producing drugs for anxiety and other disorders.

Actually this started to make so much f-ing sense for me. Almost every leftist i encountered are somewhat depressed individual on pills. I ve never met a single DEI lover who is mentally healthy. Both on the internet and in personall comunication. Every leftists who i spoke to are anxious and they take politics personally, often complaining about how they can't live a normal life in such political situation. I even feel sorry for them now that it becomes clear that their moral health is being deliberately damaged, and they don't even understand it and continue to consume what is harmful to them (news, DEI games, biased bloggers and journalists).

They f-g really believe that when the political situation changes they will feel better. They really believe that it is about situation, and not about what is in their heads because of this policy. They really believe they feel as bad as they do because of the political situation not because of how cruelly they are being brainwashed. And if people directly connect their happiness with the implementation of some policy, it means that this policy becomes a very important matter for them, a vital one.
 
Last edited:

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
The fundamental flaw in the logic is the assumption that people don't have an incredible amount of choice in what entertainment products are available to consume.
All that's happened by following DEI is its most its most devoted adherents have lost market-share, and influence.

Disney, for example, have lost eye-watering amounts of money through sacrificing all their key brands to the policy. Marvel is not what it was a few years ago, Star Wars is greatly diminished, I could go on but its pointless when its actually pretty hard to find anything in their portfolio that has over-performed since maybe Black Panther 7 years ago.

What's more, if you look at it as political propaganda its not working either, the left is in retreat across the Western world with the US leading the way and several major European nations essentially abusing their own democratic systems in order to block the ascendant right.

Its been an abject failure.
 
Top Bottom