I mean, I’m not sure how well this particular case will prove that point. They are a publisher and they’ve (at least so far) insisted that they will rehire and honour existing contracts. I’m not an expert in the field but I don’t see this hugely impacting any upcoming games’ quality.
“We had to rehire our talented employees to continue making good games” would seemingly make the point very strongly that the workers bring value, not the owner?
Fair point, but it’s kicking the can down the road. Insert “…to continue publishing good games,” “…to continue doing good work,” “…to continue functioning” instead and the argument still works. But you’re right, they’re a publisher, not a developer, that’s my mistake.
To be fair - the best publishers I’ve worked with have actively worked to make sure resourcing that’s needed is allocated even if it’s been beyond our means.
I mean, I’m not sure how well this particular case will prove that point. They are a publisher and they’ve (at least so far) insisted that they will rehire and honour existing contracts. I’m not an expert in the field but I don’t see this hugely impacting any upcoming games’ quality.
“We had to rehire our talented employees to continue making good games” would seemingly make the point very strongly that the workers bring value, not the owner?
They don’t make the games though.
Fair point, but it’s kicking the can down the road. Insert “…to continue publishing good games,” “…to continue doing good work,” “…to continue functioning” instead and the argument still works. But you’re right, they’re a publisher, not a developer, that’s my mistake.
If the workers don’t make the games, who do you think does?
They’re a publisher, not a developer. Publishers don’t make games. They sell them.
The workers at the game studios that Annapurna works with, seeing as how they are a publisher not a developer.
To be fair - the best publishers I’ve worked with have actively worked to make sure resourcing that’s needed is allocated even if it’s been beyond our means.