Yeah. People are being real assholes right now.
Seriously peeps. Stop being spoiled brats when someone stands up.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Unlike Blizzard, Epic Games (partially owned by Chinese company Tencent) says it won’t ban players for political speech
- Thread starter Deleted member 15428
- Start date
Yeah. People are being real assholes right now.
Seriously peeps. Stop being spoiled brats when someone stands up.
Yeah right, Tencent is essentially a state-owned company and the state ain't gonna let this Hong Kong shit slide.
To be fair, we don't know what Blizzard's rationale was. It could be that it was more about them not wanting to step on the Chinese government's toes for fear of economical repercussions rather than Tencent whispering in their ear. But yeah, this statement sounds good but actions will speak louder than words.
As usual Blizzard's dogshit management has no idea what they are doing. The NBA made the right call now Epic. They can't skirt this. They broadcast too many esports. If Blizzard is doubling down on the censorship it will be an ongoing matter because they live stream too much content to adequately censor without looking like trash.
I'm going to end up saving this thread as a permanent reminder of how even a relatively good discussion forum like resetera can turn to garbage full of factually inaccurate posts and misplaced hatred as soon as tribalism enters the picture.
If you're one of the many negative responders in this thread I'd like to genuinely ask what you think epic could have said when asked about this situation that would be better than what they really said.
If you're one of the many negative responders in this thread I'd like to genuinely ask what you think epic could have said when asked about this situation that would be better than what they really said.
The thing is, Tim Sweeney can say whatever he wants to the western public, the question is, would he go against the CCP? He can be the controlling share-holder, but Epic still has a board and Tencent has some board members, if he decides to speak out against the CCP he will cause a lot of problem for Tencent and they will probably pull out from Epic, and Sweeney can say goodbye to any bussiness in China.
He will have all the respect from me if he speak to they against what is happening over there, until then, I simply can't believe the guy.
He will have all the respect from me if he speak to they against what is happening over there, until then, I simply can't believe the guy.
If they do that I'll buy it on the EGS. And everyone who has seen me on EGS threads knows how much I despise it.
Sweeney is making some bold statements through Twitter. If something does go down I truly hope he stands by his words.
Sweeney has outright stated in the past that despite having input on the board of directors, they don't actual have any legal or contractual control of the company.
I am super curious if Sweeney wants them to sell that 40% back to him or something.
I am super curious if Sweeney wants them to sell that 40% back to him or something.
Tim Sweeney has a history of saying one thing and doing the opposite, so it's fair for people here to be skeptical :shrugs:
And it's not even some misguided or misplaced hatred towards Sweeney. I'd react the same if this statement was put out by any other company. As a longtime proponent of BDS, I've seen what always happens when money is at stake.
Company is still practically half owned by tencent who are helping the CCP target muslims. He doesnt seem to bothered about that so I dont see why he shouldn't be dodging the turds being flung at him.
For sure but there's been plenty of reason to avoid making such a huge deal with a company tied to the CCP prior to that too. I mean realistically they're profiting off his company through that deal and unless he were to actually buyback the shares and cut all ties his hands aren't clean of it but hes acting as if they are which is what rubs me the wrong way with it.
He can't really be taking a moral high ground of not silencing free speech when his company is tied with tencent right now with their actions. If anything I'd personally say the ties between epic and tencent combined with their actions is more of an issue than the banning of a player.
Alright, you know what? Good for him. He's earned some of my respect. I mean he's not exactly beating around the bush there, so if he did go back on his word and submit to Winnie, the internet would never let him hear the end of it.
Fully agree in most part... let us hope he stick to his statement and not be bullied by China.
There's nothing a company can SAY !
Corporates say worthless things they don't mean all the fucking time.
Which is why any smart person doesn't fall for corporate virtue signaling and actually looks at a corporates actions when they are being forced to either commit or retract.
I hope you hold all other companies that Tencent have a stake in to that high standard too.
His statement gives some hope. It sounds like they have no control but realistically if they piss off the right people I assume they could cause them problems internally anyway.
I guess I do. Its not really a high standard I've set for them since I'm not saying boycott or anything. The only real standard is I personally won't consider their hands clean and find statements such as these ring a bit hollow if they continue to turn a blind eye elsewhere.
Any companies associated with them who cut ties I'd be more inclined to believe any positive goals they've set. That's really all there is to it
There's an admittedly fine line between "kowtowing to the Chinese government" and "trying to keep the Chinese market open". Blizzard is doing the latter. This is about money for them. The Chinese government never had to step in here.
Inside China's Massive Surveillance Operation
In Xinjiang, northwest China, the government is cracking down on the minority Muslim Uyghur population, keeping them under constant surveillance and throwing more than a million people into concentration camps. But in Istanbul, 3,000 miles away, a community of women who have escaped a life of...www.wired.com
Tencent created and maintains WeChat, among other technologies, specifically for the CCP to monitor and track civilians with a specific emphasis on the Uyghurs.
I did not know this, thanks for sharing.
Bunch of wankers.
It's not about what an average player could say in this case.
The Blizzard incident happend because a chinese pro-player said something in a chinese pro-player tournament on cameras. Epic doesn't hold any competitive tournaments in Chinas as far as I know so... it's pretty unlikely that Epic could get dragged into this in the same way like it happened to Blizzard.
sounds like two sides of the same coin to me when the threat of the government stepping in is enough
When Blizzard caves to profit-seeking, functionally they're identical since they both reach the same result.
That said, Epic is in a different position because EGS is not licensed in China, and Fortnite generates their revenues predominantly in the West. Not only is there no government pressure on him, but there's no financial pressure either. Hence, this is a non-issue for Epic, and it's why the "40% vs 5%" argument doesn't apply to Epic.
China is trying to force itself to have soft power, but it's not going to work so long as their citizens lack free expression.
They have very little to lose by saying this. If they go back on their word and pull something like Blizzard it's going to be basically as bad whether they promised they wouldn't or not. The offense is severe enough that the betrayal of going back on their word is kind of immaterial compared to the action itself. Additionally, they have much to gain by saying this now that Blizzard is going through this, because it paints them in a comparatively good light.
That said, it's still better to outwardly stand opposed to stuff like this as it sends a message, even if it turns out the message is insincere or crumbles under pressure, I suppose.
That said, it's still better to outwardly stand opposed to stuff like this as it sends a message, even if it turns out the message is insincere or crumbles under pressure, I suppose.
Thats easy to say for them. Epic is a privately owned company with only a few investors. Epic however has more than 50% ownership which cannot be changed easily. They dictate the company, not Tencent.
Activision Blizzard is highly diversified in its investors because they are publicly traded - it probably has tens of thousands if not more. With so many small shareholders only the big ones matter in decision-making. Tencent owns close to 25% which is huge and probably sufficient to dictate all decisions made.
Activision Blizzard is highly diversified in its investors because they are publicly traded - it probably has tens of thousands if not more. With so many small shareholders only the big ones matter in decision-making. Tencent owns close to 25% which is huge and probably sufficient to dictate all decisions made.
With 40% ownership of a multimillion dollar company and two bucks you can maybe get a cup of coffee.
FWIW - i think owning significant shares of a company entitles the owner to representation on the Board. Usually I think this is negotiated if/when a sale of shares goes through.
My completely naive expectation would be that Tencent gets 40% of the seats on the Board, but not enough to wield automatic majority votes, or completely fill whatever non-exec remuneration committee Epic has.
Given one person owns 50%+ they may well have specific rules/clauses written into the Board structuring giving that person more power. So even having 40% of the Board may be irrelevant if Tim Sweeney has right of veto and final say etc. Offsetting that, tencent are not going to have invested hundreds of millions without gaining some control and oversight of the company....the negotiations and trade-offs will have made several lawyers very rich.
The powers/set up of the Board are key to this as that is the legal way that someone tries to take control, or enforce the control they already have. Otherwise a minority shareholder could just sack the Board, install their own favourites and then the Board would decide to give all the profits to the minority shareholder.
Corporate governance, Boards, non-exec directors and remuneration commitees!! Always a good time.
My completely naive expectation would be that Tencent gets 40% of the seats on the Board, but not enough to wield automatic majority votes, or completely fill whatever non-exec remuneration committee Epic has.
Given one person owns 50%+ they may well have specific rules/clauses written into the Board structuring giving that person more power. So even having 40% of the Board may be irrelevant if Tim Sweeney has right of veto and final say etc. Offsetting that, tencent are not going to have invested hundreds of millions without gaining some control and oversight of the company....the negotiations and trade-offs will have made several lawyers very rich.
The powers/set up of the Board are key to this as that is the legal way that someone tries to take control, or enforce the control they already have. Otherwise a minority shareholder could just sack the Board, install their own favourites and then the Board would decide to give all the profits to the minority shareholder.
Corporate governance, Boards, non-exec directors and remuneration commitees!! Always a good time.