▲ 924 ▼ 'There's almost nobody left': CEO of Baldur's Gate 3 dev Swen Vincke says the D&D team he initially worked with is gone, due to Hasbro layoffs (www.pcgamer.com) submitted 2 years ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/games@lemmy.world 186 comments fedilink hide all child comments Suffering and success.
[–] rigatti@lemmy.world 217 points 2 years ago (3 children) Hasbro continuing to make shit decisions on behalf of WotC, the only sector of the company keeping it afloat. permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Osa-Eris-Xero512@kbin.social 73 points 2 years ago (2 children) You see, if they fire everyone from the division, it'll make even more profit. ez permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 36 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Ah, the Jack Welch method. (Seriously, fuck that guy. He was a pioneer among bloodsucking CEOS, and part of it was mass layoffs to boost short-term profits.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Honest question: what’s bad about firing the “bad performers”? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago If they wanted to fire the "bad performers" then they'd be firing the CEOs and higher ranked people, not those actually making the products work. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nothing, if that’s genuinely what you’re doing. But it’s dangerous to incentivize it, because you get short-term gains by firing anyone, whether or not it’s the right long-term call. It’s also just difficult to identify bad performers. Fundamental attribution error is a bitch. And because we’re really bad at seeing the entire system surrounding someone’s productivity, we tend to blame operator error only to find that the next operator we hire has the exact same problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent [–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago There’s no one there left to defend the IP, so they can do evil things. I’m guessing it’s as intended. permalink fedilink source parent [–] snor10@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think Barbie would like a word permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 years ago That's Mattel. And one of the reasons why Hasbro looks so bad in comparison. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago That's Mattel. permalink fedilink source parent [+] corytheboyd@kbin.social -15 points 2 years ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThugJesus@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) Barbie is Mattel, not Hasbro. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] corytheboyd@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* Fuck I mixed up my board game doll companies lol permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Osa-Eris-Xero512@kbin.social 73 points 2 years ago (2 children) You see, if they fire everyone from the division, it'll make even more profit. ez permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 36 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Ah, the Jack Welch method. (Seriously, fuck that guy. He was a pioneer among bloodsucking CEOS, and part of it was mass layoffs to boost short-term profits.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Honest question: what’s bad about firing the “bad performers”? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago If they wanted to fire the "bad performers" then they'd be firing the CEOs and higher ranked people, not those actually making the products work. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nothing, if that’s genuinely what you’re doing. But it’s dangerous to incentivize it, because you get short-term gains by firing anyone, whether or not it’s the right long-term call. It’s also just difficult to identify bad performers. Fundamental attribution error is a bitch. And because we’re really bad at seeing the entire system surrounding someone’s productivity, we tend to blame operator error only to find that the next operator we hire has the exact same problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent [–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago There’s no one there left to defend the IP, so they can do evil things. I’m guessing it’s as intended. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 36 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Ah, the Jack Welch method. (Seriously, fuck that guy. He was a pioneer among bloodsucking CEOS, and part of it was mass layoffs to boost short-term profits.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Honest question: what’s bad about firing the “bad performers”? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago If they wanted to fire the "bad performers" then they'd be firing the CEOs and higher ranked people, not those actually making the products work. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nothing, if that’s genuinely what you’re doing. But it’s dangerous to incentivize it, because you get short-term gains by firing anyone, whether or not it’s the right long-term call. It’s also just difficult to identify bad performers. Fundamental attribution error is a bitch. And because we’re really bad at seeing the entire system surrounding someone’s productivity, we tend to blame operator error only to find that the next operator we hire has the exact same problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Honest question: what’s bad about firing the “bad performers”? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago If they wanted to fire the "bad performers" then they'd be firing the CEOs and higher ranked people, not those actually making the products work. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nothing, if that’s genuinely what you’re doing. But it’s dangerous to incentivize it, because you get short-term gains by firing anyone, whether or not it’s the right long-term call. It’s also just difficult to identify bad performers. Fundamental attribution error is a bitch. And because we’re really bad at seeing the entire system surrounding someone’s productivity, we tend to blame operator error only to find that the next operator we hire has the exact same problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] caseofthematts@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago If they wanted to fire the "bad performers" then they'd be firing the CEOs and higher ranked people, not those actually making the products work. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kibiz0r@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (1 child) Nothing, if that’s genuinely what you’re doing. But it’s dangerous to incentivize it, because you get short-term gains by firing anyone, whether or not it’s the right long-term call. It’s also just difficult to identify bad performers. Fundamental attribution error is a bitch. And because we’re really bad at seeing the entire system surrounding someone’s productivity, we tend to blame operator error only to find that the next operator we hire has the exact same problem. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Lianodel@ttrpg.network 1 point 2 years ago Exactly. It's just goosing the numbers. The company made this much in profit, and the cost-cutting from firing people will save money immediately, so it looks great... on paper... for a little while. It doesn't matter if the company is gutted, because the CEO and most of the investors will dip before things get too bad, and go onto the next thing. The employees will suffer and the customers will be upset, but CEOs don't answer to them, they answer to shareholders, and shareholders just want the line to go up this quarter. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago There’s no one there left to defend the IP, so they can do evil things. I’m guessing it’s as intended. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] snor10@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago (2 children) I think Barbie would like a word permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 years ago That's Mattel. And one of the reasons why Hasbro looks so bad in comparison. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago That's Mattel. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] squirrel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 years ago That's Mattel. And one of the reasons why Hasbro looks so bad in comparison. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] corytheboyd@kbin.social -15 points 2 years ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] ThugJesus@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) Barbie is Mattel, not Hasbro. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] corytheboyd@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* Fuck I mixed up my board game doll companies lol permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ThugJesus@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 child) Barbie is Mattel, not Hasbro. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] corytheboyd@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* Fuck I mixed up my board game doll companies lol permalink fedilink source parent
[–] corytheboyd@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* Fuck I mixed up my board game doll companies lol permalink fedilink source parent