One of the most historic studios is closing down. Unfortunately it was dead long ago. Fuck EA

  • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    For Bioware, no. It’s too late for them. For the future, it’d prevent companies like EA buying up every half-successful dev company and feeding their IP into the machine to milk our nostalgia for profit.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      But it wouldn’t prevent them from buying the IP. The only thing that solves the problem is preventing ip from changing hands, but that would definitely cause problems

      • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        It would reduce it, at least. Part of what makes those deals appealing to devs is the idea that the umbrella corporation will handle the business so the devs can do the dev work they love. Many of them would be much more reluctant to sell off ownership of their concepts and work entirely, and the ubrella corps would find it harder to milk nostalgia when they’ve only bought the name and not any of the creative team that made it real. Not impossible, but harder.

        • FishFace@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          If buying a company is illegal, there’s still no (practical) way to prevent the buying company say, “we’ll put you in your own separate Bioware team, no management changes for at least a year, we’ll hire anyone who wants to come over” etc. Basically, you’d have the exact same situation practically, just the legal bollocks would be different and it’d be slightly less convenient.

          • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Good. So much of adjusting people’s behaviour is just making it more convenient to do the right thing and less convenient to do the wrong thing. It’s impossible to get people to behave perfectly all the time, but the more inconvenient you make it to do the wrong thing, the more the human tendency toward laziness will keep them passively on the right path. There are no desire paths in a hedge maze.

                • FishFace@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Same way it makes this negative thing more inconvenient - there are legit reasons for a company to own another one, because it basically just helps organisation and accounting.

                  • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    What legit reasons? Seriously. What real world situations are there where allowing companies to own companies promotes a healthy society/economy/etc.? (Not just benefitting the shareholders, and not just the accountants. That’s not enough.)