Strip Poker Night at the Inventory. THAT would have saved Telltale. Let me tell Kev Bruner.

Epic Games Store store?

edit: it is like some o my other favorites. Naan means bread, so Naan bread = Bread bread. Chai means tea, so Chai Tea = Tea tea

Linguist hint: this thing is well-known as pleonasm.

Short of constraints against unlawful activity...

... no constraint on day-to-day ethical business behavior has worked or will work...

... especially I would argue in the business of video games.

Think of the rabbit hole that grows deeper via conflict, weaponry, etc. in games; how would a Cyberpunk 2077 get made? Think of the intense amount of money and energy needed to produce entertainment (how is this "sustainable?"). What is the social return on entertainment that costs million of dollars to produce but has no tangible, physical value? How much carbon has been burned for just one Geralt animation?

IMHO ESG is just a top-down utopian control mechanism applied to the economics of businesses. It's a new wrinkle on an old idea... that's never worked. People want to progress and to have the relative freedom to do so. ESG is regression...

... and seen by many as a tactic for de-industrialization.

Should businesses be socially and environmentally responsible? Certainly... if they choose to be. Just as consumers / customers can choose to do business (or not) with a socially and / or environmentally conscious company. IMO ESG "softly" strips that choice via finance and demands socially and environmentally responsible action... and in fact builds the framework for policing on these grounds.

But we've seen it hundreds of times...

... authoritarian structures created to limit freedom given names and missions that make them sound positive... all done to mislead people and businesses into accepting "chains."

IMHO entertainment and video games will see the first backlash to this control mechanism. When consumers can no longer blow off steam in their favorite past-time (which may no longer resemble that favorite past-time)...

Hello fellow revolutionaries, I too like Starbucks.

Sent from Twitler for iPhone.

Advocating Corporations should be free of Ethical responsibility and using Cyberpunk as an example just blew my Irony-meter, Its just gone nuclear.

Just.... Wow

Watching the link, I thought it was a trailer for the 3rd Borat film, Borat's guide to European business. lol I wish I could unsee that nonsense. I'll sum it up...blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. We are culturally and socially aware. We are super nice. Love us because we are in touch with our inner weirdos. Perhaps this is what happened with Cyberpunk. Hmmm..... All this tells me is that the company is going the wrong direction in every way possible. You won't have real games anymore, just some ugly little programs a diverse group of folks agreed to create with every little aspect designed to be inclusive, non-offensive, and socially appropriate. In other words, a manufactured view of reality. CDPR will be too busy holding hands, moderating hurt feelings, and generally coddling the employees to feel included. Kinda like the forums.......

That's not what kai2 said. But then again I wouldn't expect a guy who thinks that FA is the best Star Wars movie because it had the biggest boxoffice(and simultaniously ignores that TLJ grossed only half of FA and TRoS even less) to be able to understand something that is too complex to explain in one line.

You did not read what I wrote

Just wow indeed. You lived all this time thinking corporations weren't bound by laws (like every other legal person in every country) until ESG came along?

Yes and they were also the top in terms of the cost. You are also still ignoring the fact that TLJ grossed less than TFA and RoS grossed less than TLJ.
So, basically you think that you can't make good laws because Elites will always find a way to undermine and abuse the law. But at the same time you believe those same Elites couldn't find a way to undermine or abuse the institution or whatever you use to enforce ehtics?

You can stop hitting that strawman. No one is fighting against empathy or the usage of people as scapegoats here.

All you had to do is read the replies in this thread, where the quiet part is said loud and clear. No, it means a company cannot be and remain profitable if it doesn't focus on the product it's supposed to deliver. That's just basic logic. - Oscars viewership in an increasingly descending gutter
- Gillette got an $8 billion write-down from P&G
- Battlefield V bombed and caused EA's stock prices to face its worst drop in more than a decade
- DC and Marvel comics' division is dying a slow death, with the former on course for a second buyout in two years, and the latter holding very firmly to momma Disney's udders
- Boy Scouts of America filed for bankruptcy
- Netflix canceling shows left and right where they took social justice liberties with the source material
- Ghostbusters 2016 needs no elaboration
- Lightyear managed to spectacularly squander decades of goodwill buildup by Pixar
- The Rise of Skywalker made $1 billion less than The Force Awakens.
- Rings of Power is losing viewers (or "samplers", as the spinning jargon goes) instead of gaining them as new episodes are released, with a nearly 20% drop recently

Among many others. See, the thing is, "get woke, go broke" isn't some sort of cheat code that will immediately bring a megacorporation to its knees. Nor does it mean that films lifted up by the entertainment juggernaut that was the MCU phases 1-3 wouldn't make money. It means it's not sustainable, inevitably goes to shit and hurts brands in the long run.

Do you drink coffee? Eat chocolate?

Quite the ballsy lie, there.

This whole "woke" psychosis is purely political. Not even ideological, but political. It's a reaction (in the reactionary sense) to racism and sexism being problematized. It's just an irritation and a vague scare at the realization that anti-racism, sexual parity and inclusion (and even ecological concerns) are getting recognized as unavoidable concerns in all aspects of society. It clashes with conservative values, and worse, it echoes the values with which progressives have been guilt-tripping conservatives for ages. It represents the enemy, the "them". Therefore it has to be designated as the threat, the cause of everything bad. No matter how contrived the reasoning (after all, it has to make "antiracism is bad" sound different from "racism is good", and just having to resort to such awkward mental gymnastics is a source of irritation, as it's an implicitly conceded victory of the opponent's "racism is bad" position).

And you end up with that. Take average, disappointing or just bad commercial movies, and try to relate their flaws (even when you clearly analyse them, as unrelated factors) to matters of diversity and social representation. "Look there is a plot hole, this is because they hired a black actor, if they had a white actor they wouldn't have had that plot hole".

Pure us-vs-them panic, on the side of embarrassed evil. Pure politics. And if mods consider this post here too "political" because it scratches the thin paint over the stakes of such "discussion", then better just lock the thread. Because this is the actual dialogue that has been going on all the long, since post 1.