Found the person that doesn’t read the article!

Let’s not gatekeep “real gamers”.

You should also read his comment again. He is not saying that a game is only worth playing once because the story or game is linear. Although no sources are cited, he is probably right that a fair percentage of people pick up a game and drop it soon after because it wasn’t what they thought it would be or any number of other reasons.

Even if you are an indie gamer, the sheer number of indie games that come out each year is overwhelming, and again a lot are not super polished so you can probably also see people picking it up, playing it, not being impressed and then dropping the game.

So why spend $10 a pop per game when you can pay for one month and enjoy many of them?

There is no need to be materialistic. Yes there are games you will want to go back to in a few years or take your time with, but there are many many games that you may never touch again. If you think this is a minority opinion, check out some Steam stats. I think they support OPs argument.

There are also reasons subscription based models can and do suck, there is a reason they are popular.

The article is confusing but it sounds like the union wants both C and G at the table, but C and G both agree that C should be the employer and G doesn’t need to join the talks. So C is saying, if you really want G to join, you’ll have to wait until the appeals are finished.

I’m guessing the union doesn’t want to negotiate with C, have C go to G with the terms and G refuse and just causing endless delays in a game of telephone bargaining.

A third party isn’t them though. I get what you are saying because LMG writes the check, but realistically that’s the best anyone can do. Why would the government get involved? Specifically why would taxpayers pay to help rehabilitate a private company’s reputation?

Private independent auditors are in every industry and a standard practice.

Oh, and as long as we’re being cynical, let’s say you got your wish and a government entity does the investigation. Odds are they would just contract it out to these same people. Same results, only everyone gets to charge more for their services.

Aside from ordering a third party investigator, how else can a company prove to itself and everyone that they are serious about corrective action?

You’re essentially saying they are guilty of everything and no matter the findings which haven’t even begun, there is a conspiracy. I don’t see how that cynicism is productive.

To further this thought, it makes it really easy for any motivated party to profile accounts.

Create an account that posts intentionally politically motivated news or comments.

Rinse and repeat a few times and now you the data you want.