Support NeoGAF

[_Final_Phoenix_]

Why should there be something from Sony when the subsidiary (Naughty Dog) have already put out an official response? What more is necessary?

As for the "official" reason he was dismissed, it's in the OP. He had a breakdown which lead to him being made "redundant".

If Sony is involved in a story, and if they are the ones that both tried to give him the 20k in exchange for silence and fired him for refusing, they should be contacted. That's how journalism works, every side and party must be contacted for as clear a picture as possible (though this totally flies in the face of my earlier argument of how the media is taking too long to respond, but that was mainly because I've never seen game journalists actually take their time and do their due diligence before)

And the reason for dismissal, not only is that claim made by the very person who was fired, it's also a TERRIBLE thing to be fired for.

"They cited the company was moving in a different direction and my job was no longer needed."

in other words, "Hey, you're having a mental health episode, gtfo". That seems pretty damn bad for Sony, too.

If that's not true, and his dismissal really had nothing to do with harassment or having a breakdown, then we should hear that from ND and Sony. And they'll only say that if someone actually does the digging, no matter how hard and uncomfortable it may be.

EDIT: Lots of clarification added

 

[olag]

Gonna wait and see with this one.

There is a definite possibly that he is telling the truth and if so the he should be compensated quickly and the guilty lead should be fired at the very least.

But Im a bit hesitant to take his word for it at the moment. Naughty dog has a lot of issues but I would have imagined sexual harassment to be a big nono in their offices. Ofcoarse, sexual harassment isn't always public, it has a clear victim and this doesn't take into account how much influence and power the Lead had during that time but sometimes the situations arent always so cut and dry either.

Here's hoping this is investigated and dealt with ASAP.

 

[orochi91]

And the reason for dismissal, not only is that claim made by the very person who was fired, it's also a TERRIBLE thing to be fired for. in other words, "Hey, you're having a mental health episode, gtfo". That seems pretty damn bad for Sony, too.

If that's true, then we should hear that from ND and Sony. And they'll only say that if someone actually does the digging, no matter how hard and uncomfortable it may be.

It sounds like his position was made redundant, hence why he was fired.

I've seen that exact same wording used when some of my friends got laid off a few years back.

 

[xkramz]

I don't know much about laws but how illegal are these allegations? like other than sexual misconduct, which could get you arrested, would bribing someone to stay shut put you in jail too? What kinda penalty can one see?

 

[RedRedSuit]

Gonna wait and see with this one.

There is a definite possibly that he is telling the truth and if so the he should be compensated quickly and the guilty lead should be fired at the very least.

But Im a bit hesitant to take his word for it at the moment. Naughty dog has a lot of issues but I would have imagined sexual harassment to be a big nono in their offices. Ofcoarse, sexual harassment isn't always public, it has a clear victim and this doesn't take into account how much influence and power the Lead had during that time but sometimes the situations arent always so cut and dry either.

Here's hoping this is investigated and dealt with ASAP.

What about ND makes you think sexual harassment is a no-no there to any greater extent than elsewhere?

All it takes is one guy, allegedly that lead in this case, to be a poor human being. How would ND know to prevent that?

Bad people are everywhere. Can't prevent that. It's how they're dealt with by the corporation -- that's what counts.

 

[Muffin1611]

Assuming we have the worst case at our hands and the ex-employee did his complaint at Sony HR verbally, thus doesn't have any written evidence on his hands, what are his options from there? Could there a case be made to properly review why he was fired and if cited reason was really the case?

 

[RedRedSuit]

Here's a realistic scenario for you.

Ballard gets harassed by lead X. Complains to HR. HR contacts lead X and tells him about accusation. Lead X persuasively argues that the accusations are bullshit, and moreover Ballard hasn't had his head in the game for months and has been having trouble focusing on work, and we don't really need his area of expertise anyway.

HR considers the he said/she said, decides that there's not enough proof by Ballard to hurt them, sides with lead X, and fires Ballard. In the process they offer a very standard (actually rather low) $20k severance with a very typical non-disparagement clause.

---

Could happen, right? Now in this case did Sony HR act properly? First reaction is no. If they cannot establish Ballard is telling truth, they should at least help him through counseling and help him become productive again; and separate lead X and Ballard. On the other hand, what they did is arguably cruel but not necessarily criminal. IF there's no proof, and lead X says the guy isn't necessary anyway, it's Mahiavellian but from their POV justified to do what they did.

It sucks.

 

[GHG]

If Sony is involved in a story, and if they are the ones that both tried to give him the 20k in exchange for silence and fired him for refusing, they should be contacted. That's how journalism works, every side and party must be contacted for as clear a picture as possible (though this totally flies in the face of my earlier argument of how the media is taking too long to respond, but that was mainly because I've never seen game journalists actually take their time and do their due diligence before)

And the reason for dismissal, not only is that claim made by the very person who was fired, it's also a TERRIBLE thing to be fired for. in other words, "Hey, you're having a mental health episode, gtfo". That seems pretty damn bad for Sony, too.

If that's not true, and his dismissal really had nothing to do with harassment or having a breakdown, then we should hear that from ND and Sony. And they'll only say that if someone actually does the digging, no matter how hard and uncomfortable it may be.

EDIT: Lots of clarification added

You need to read through the thread because you're misunderstanding a number of things here.

If he was dismissed due to the reasons he has outlined in his Twitter posts (position no longer needed, i.e. redundancy) then the offer of a severance package that followed is standard practice.

They didn't fire him for refusing the severance package, you are only ever offered a severance package if you are already being fired/made redundant.

The sequence of events is laid out in his tweets in the OP.

 

[olag]

What about ND makes you think sexual harassment is a no-no there to any greater extent than elsewhere?

All it takes is one guy, allegedly that lead in this case, to be a poor human being. How would ND know to prevent that?

Bad people are everywhere. Can't prevent that. It's how they're dealt with by the corporation -- that's what counts.

Please feel free to read the second sentence. I already alluded to how harassment can still occur without the main company's knowledge.

My comment on ND was mostly conjecture based on the direction and the inclusive nature of their games. Given the political climate in America, you'd imagine ND to take a zero tolerance approach to sexual/racial harrassment but as I've said harassment isnt always public and there are power dynamics to consider.

And who knows, this might be the first of whistle blowers but until this is investigated Im not getting any pitchforks out.

 

[_Final_Phoenix_]

You need to read through the thread because you're misunderstanding a number of things here.

If he was dismissed due to the reasons he has outlined in his Twitter posts (position no longer needed, i.e. redundancy) then the offer of a severance package that followed is standard practice.

They didn't fire him for refusing the severance package, you are only ever offered a severance package if you are already being fired/made redundant.

The sequence of events is laid out in his tweets in the OP.

That part is true, but my point still stands. If the firing and offer of 20k in exchange for silence came from Sony, and if the employee told Sony this, then a journalist should be trying to get info from Sony themselves, not just settle for a public response from a relevant subsidiary. Really, the only thing I made a mistake on was he was fired for refusing, instead of fired then refusing. But the reason I brought those up in the first place is to outline a Sony department's role in the story.

Source: Am journalism student. Had this hammered into my brain for three years and counting now.

 

[RedRedSuit]

Please feel free to read the second sentence. I already alluded to how harassment can still occur without the main company's knowledge.

My comment on ND was mostly conjecture based on the direction and the inclusive nature of their games. Given the political climate in America, you'd imagine ND to take a zero tolerance approach to sexual/racial harrassment but as I've said harassment isnt always public and there are power dynamics to consider.

And who knows, this might be the first of whistle blowers but until this is investigated Im not getting any pitchforks out.

Okay, so it's the "inclusive nature of their games" that led you to think ND would be particularly strong against harassment.

Now suppose for a moment that about 5-10 people are responsible for crafting their stories. Those people are the writers and creative leads. They just happen to be nice progressive people sitting in one corner of the building.

Now suppose, for the sake of argument, that the programmers are a bunch of sexist bros in another corner of the building, led by some old-school manly man. Suppose they barely have contact with women and don't know how to act properly when one happens to be around.

And in another corner of the building are some soulless HR bots who only care about their jobs and have only a vague idea who the creatives are or the progressive content of the games.

 

[Mattenth]

If the firing and offer of 20k in exchange for silence came from Sony, and if the employee told Sony this, then a journalist should be trying to get info from Sony themselves, not just settle for a public response from a relevant subsidiary.

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

 

[NoName999]

Gaming and Off Topic are night and day on these topics.

Not really. The same garbage responses pop up in OT as well.

More like night and dusk to be more accurate.

 

[adversarial]

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

This

 

[_Final_Phoenix_]

My comment on ND was mostly conjecture based on the direction and the inclusive nature of their games. Given the political climate in America, you'd imagine ND to take a zero tolerance approach to sexual/racial harrassment but as I've said harassment isnt always public and there are power dynamics to consider.

I mean, Weinstein company produced multiple movies with strong female characters. Doesn't mean anything.

Assuming it's true, it just means that this exec who allegedly harassed Ballard cared more about their own sex drive than following the inclusive nature of their games. In a way, it's like being shocked that a company that touts how environmentally friendly they still has execs who don't give a damn about the environment. It's just that, in this case, the exec targeted a person, not the environment.

Just because ND has inclusive themes in their games doesn't mean they actually care, for all we know, they just figure it will help with sales, is "trendy" to be inclusive, or maybe a majority of them really do believe in those themes...Until it threatens a valuable high ranking member's position.

Just as there's not enough info for pitchforks against ND and Sony to make assumptions, you can't make assumptions that their games have certain values because every single executive and high ranking member believes in those same values.

 

[_Final_Phoenix_]

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

Because Ballard claimed specifically that Sony Playstaion HR was involved in the situation. Second tweet.

In February 2016 I had a mental breakdown at work & Sony Playstation HR became involved. When I told them about the harassment they... 2/

Meaning they're part of the story, so anyone who fancies themselves a journalist would try and contact the relevant company. Instead, so far we've only seen Polygon wait for a public response from ND to quote, and call it a day.

 

[olag]

Okay, so it's the "inclusive student of their games" that led you to think ND would be particularly strong against harassment.

Now suppose for a moment that about 5-10 people are responsible for crafting their stories. Those people are the writers and creative leads. They just happen to be nice progressive people sitting in one corner of the building.

Now suppose, for the sake of argument, that the programmers are a bunch of sexist bros in another corner of the building, led by some old-school manly man. Suppose they barely have contact with women and don't know how to act properly when one happens to be around.

And in another corner of the building are some soulless HR bots who only care about their jobs and have only a vague idea who the creatives are or the progressive content of the games.

Again, you seem to be latching onto the first part of my statements, which I have already said is conjecture which may or may not indicate ND's general internal stance on various social issues. Obviously I may be wrong and as I have said for the third time now, the harrassment case in question may have occurred out of sight or the lead might have influenced the situation to keep everything under wraps

With all that said I dont exactly get what point you are trying to make here because by the sounds of it I agree with you but it sounds like you are arguing something Im not getting.

 

[Humdinger]

Sony HR wouldn't say anything.

 

[RedRedSuit]

Again, you seem to be latching onto the first part of my statements, which I have already said is conjecture which may or may not indicate ND's general internal stance on various social issues. Obviously I may be wrong and as I have said for the third time now, the harrassment case in question may have occurred out of sight or the lead might have influenced the situation to keep everything under wraps

With all that said I dont exactly get what point you are trying to make here because by the sounds of it I agree with you but it sounds like you are arguing something Im not getting.

Not every post is meant to be an argument against something. It's food for thought, explaining how an apparently progressive company can actually house all kinds of nefarious cultural evil.

 

[Hesemonni]

I'm trying to figure out a situation where parent company's HR would be involved in subsidiary's employee business. Could somebody enlighten me a bit?

 

[Garrett 2U]

Why should there be something from Sony when the subsidiary (Naughty Dog) have already put out an official response? What more is necessary?

As for the "official" reason he was dismissed, it's in the OP. He had a breakdown which lead to him being made "redundant".

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

According to the allegation, he had a mental breakdown at work and the issue was escalated to Sony Playstation’s HR team. He told them (Sony HR) about the harassment he received from the lead. They (Sony HR) fired him the next day. They (Sony HR) are the ones who offered money for silence.

You’d expect that Naughty Dog wouldn’t have any record because the issue was escalated to PlayStation HR before the harassment was brought to light.

I’m not suggesting a conspiracy, but that is why people would like a response from Sony.

In February 2016 I had a mental breakdown at work & Sony Playstation HR became involved. When I told them about the harassment they... 2/

...ended the call and fired me the next day. They cited the company was moving in a different direction and my job was no longer needed. 3/

They tried to silence me by offering $20,000 if I signed a letter agreeing to the termination as well as to not discuss it with anyone. 4/

 

[Pastry]

According to the allegation, he had a mental breakdown at work and the issue was escalated to Sony Playstation’s HR team. He told them (Sony HR) about the harassment he received from the lead. They (Sony HR) fired him the next day. They (Sony HR) are the ones who offered money for silence.

You’d expect that Naughty Dog wouldn’t have any record because the issue was escalated to PlayStation HR before the harassment was brought to light.

I’m not suggesting a conspiracy, but that is why people would like a response from Sony.

They didn’t offer money for silence, it would have been a standard severance package. If you agree to said package you also give up rights to sue, disparage them, etc.. That is completely normal across a wide variety of industries.

 

[Garrett 2U]

They didn’t offer money for silence, it would have been a standard severance package. If you agree to said package you also give up rights to sue, disparage them, etc.. That is completely normal across a wide variety of industries.

Okay sorry for the confusion, I was just trying to use his words to explain why Sony should respond to the situation.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I'm trying to figure out a situation where parent company's HR would be involved in subsidiary's employee business. Could somebody enlighten me a bit?

In my company for example which is a limited company owned by a much bigger company after an acquisition we have a local HR person but they report into the main HR team back at HQ which is in a different country. HQ HR get involved when they need to. Day to day stuff handled locally.

 

[Curufinwe]

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

I wish I had read this before I threw all my PlayStations in the trash.

 

[Jinfash]

What a terrible situation to be in if there is no hard proof. It accentuates the obvious dangers of reporting sexual harrasment from the victim's perspective. You are left potentially dealing with lawyers, corporate PR, and in this case, staunch fans of gaming companies that easily turn into another internet mob on social media.

It's the exact reason why a lot of these incidents go unreported. The crushing fear of being in situation.

Without proof it's unphill endless battle between sympathizers and cyncics.

 

[massoluk]

You do a proper investigation to see if what he’s saying is true. Their statement is an attempt to get people to stop caring about this, it shows no indication they care about harassment.

The way I see it. There isn't going to be paper trail of course, so quick to dismiss it like this just because is saying we are totally going to pretend this could never happen

 

[jschreier]

Meaning they're part of the story, so anyone who fancies themselves a journalist would try and contact the relevant company. Instead, so far we've only seen Polygon wait for a public response from ND to quote, and call it a day.

Lotta ignorance in this thread. Naughty Dog's PR is Sony's PR. They are one and the same. The current statement was put together by both SIE and Naughty Dog. It was e-mailed to me, and presumably other reporters, by Sony's PR director.

 

[HMD]

Shouldn't Sony disclose why they fired him in the first place? If what they said in the statement is true and he was fired for legitimate purposes wouldn't that help their case?

 

[kliklik]

Lotta ignorance in this thread. Naughty Dog's PR is Sony's PR. They are one and the same. The current statement was put together by both SIE and Naughty Dog. It was e-mailed to me, and presumably other reporters, by Sony's PR director.

Sony wouldn't be able to disclose the details of HR personnel files and investigations to the press, right? You wouldn't be able to find out if he brought up sexual harassment and that was recorded in the files when they got involved due to his mental breakdown (and probably absences from work that resulted)?

 

[ArtHands]

I'm not sure how Sony is really relevant to any of this.

Naughty Dog is a fully independent subsidiary. They have their own HR team, their own recruiters, etc.

Parent companies just don't get involved in their subsidiary's HR problems like that. You wouldn't expect Tencent to get involved in Riot's HR. You wouldn't expect Verizon to get involved in AOL's HR. And you wouldn't expect AOL to get involved in Huffington Post's HR. Naughty Dog put out the statement, not Sony.

Its sad we still have sony fanboys trying to distance Sony from this Naughty Dog scandal, when the OP already said Playstation HR is involved

 

[stan423321]

Shouldn't Sony disclose why they fired him in the first place? If what they said in the statement is true and he was fired for legitimate purposes wouldn't that help their case?

Besides boilerplate, the statement just says they didn't find anything at the moment. Including extra information, especially one sourced from potentially tampered documentation, is a terrible idea.

Consider the following scenario. Harassment did happen, and harasser and friends commited a file where they bluff victim's position got redundant, but it actually didn't and if asked about the details, some team members would find it peculiar. If ND quietly asks about this, it's very useful circumstantial evidence. If they parrot file contents, it opens them to fire. If they quote it, it opens them to fire anyway as people don't understand quoting, and even if they do why would you quote it if you don't trust it, when not discussing the file itself?

 

[kyser73]

I'm trying to figure out a situation where parent company's HR would be involved in subsidiary's employee business. Could somebody enlighten me a bit?

The parent company may well be responsible for many or all HR functions. The subsidiary may also use the same ERP software, or have a policy of referring inquiries to the parent company.

 

[Liliana Eileen]

Shouldn't Sony disclose why they fired him in the first place? If what they said in the statement is true and he was fired for legitimate purposes wouldn't that help their case?

It's probably in their best interest not to, especially if this backfires badly in their faces.

 

[CalamityPixel]

Still interested to see Sony's response from them. I find it odd it cane from Naughty Dog and not their owners.

 

[Muffin1611]

Still interested to see Sony's response from them. I find it odd it cane from Naughty Dog and not their owners.

Lotta ignorance in this thread. Naughty Dog's PR is Sony's PR. They are one and the same. The current statement was put together by both SIE and Naughty Dog. It was e-mailed to me, and presumably other reporters, by Sony's PR director.

.

 

[Skux]

Shouldn't Sony disclose why they fired him in the first place? If what they said in the statement is true and he was fired for legitimate purposes wouldn't that help their case?

No, that would violate privacy laws, not to mention would be extremely petty.

ND is not going to release private employment information just so they can "exonerate" themselves in front of the internet. There's a reason all this stuff happens behind closed doors.

 

[CalamityPixel]

.

Ah didn't see that, thank you my friend.

 

[Frozone]

I'd imagine the 20k might be put under buckets of severance, bonus or time off payouts, etc. But in order to receive the money, the employee needs to sign a termination of employment agreement, which can include NDA's and waiving the right to sue the company. I was laid off a couple of years ago, not on bad terms, but as a result of a merger, and was required to sign all these kinds of documents to get my severance paid out. Luckily in my instance, I knew it was just standard procedure and there was no ill will, but in a case where the employee has a grievance against the employer, it really makes it tough, as a lot of people may need that severance or time off payment to continue paying rent, etc., forcing them to neglect their accusations in favor of just getting by.

EDIT: Also, if he was a contract employee, and not FTE salary, it might have been paying out some of his remaining contract. These are all just guesses, but trying to give examples of different forms the 20k payout could have taken.

Yup, happened to me before. I *will* be more prepared to survive on my own liquid funds this time around if something like my experience happens in the future.

 

[RoboPlato]

Shouldn't Sony disclose why they fired him in the first place? If what they said in the statement is true and he was fired for legitimate purposes wouldn't that help their case?

I believe that's illegal with California labor laws. A lot of this is tied up by the legal system. That's why we got a cold, standard response. Even if there was a desire elaborate any more on details, the Sony's legal team likely put a lid on that immediately.

 

[ronaldthump]

Without actual proof of what DB said happened, there has to be some paper trail seeing how its an employment issue - and the fact there’s nothing tabled = suss

ND has widely been known for being a great place to work and I doubt that they would have handled DB’s case the way they did if there were any real grounds. Who gets fired for reporting harrassment? You think if you think; you’d take it lying down? Especially in America which is a country filled with legal-happy people.

Either way, no one can really know anything. The “debate” can’t go anywhere til new infomation surfaces and its highly unlikely it will.

 

[cartographer]

Without actual proof of what DB said happened, there has to be some paper trail seeing how its an employment issue - and the fact there’s nothing tabled = suss

ND has widely been known for being a great place to work and I doubt that they would have handled DB’s case the way they did if there were any real grounds. Who gets fired for reporting harrassment? You think if you think; you’d take it lying down? Especially in America which is a country filled with legal-happy people.

Either way, no one can really know anything. The “debate” can’t go anywhere til new infomation surfaces and its highly unlikely it will.

Re: bolded

As others have said in this thread that seems to often not be the case. Where are you getting it from?

 

[Grumplestiltskin]

ND has widely been known for being a great place to work

Uhh no. Unless by "great place to work" you mean legendary for their horrific crunch culture.

Who gets fired for reporting harrassment? You think if you think; you'd take it lying down? Especially in America which is a country filled with legal-happy people.

Have you been living under a rock for the past 2 weeks? We literally just had a huge scandal about these very things being threatened and repeatedly happening not only in America but in the very same state no less.

Either way, no one can really know anything. The ”debate" can't go anywhere til new infomation surfaces and its highly unlikely it will.

Regardless of knowing all the information you can still have a discussion about the implications this would have for both parties were it true or false. There is still also a debate to be had about the larger issue of how we as a culture handle these sorts of accusations in the work plce and the victims who make them. Situations like what has been said to occur here are exactly the sort many have claimed plague a variety of industries in this country. There is certainly room for discussion and debate on this topic even just as it relates to this industry in particular without levying a definitive claim of culpability in either direction. Shutting down the discussions of the broader implications and pervasiveness of such things is not the answer.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Lotta ignorance in this thread. Naughty Dog's PR is Sony's PR. They are one and the same. The current statement was put together by both SIE and Naughty Dog. It was e-mailed to me, and presumably other reporters, by Sony's PR director.

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[Bishop89]

I'm trying to figure out a situation where parent company's HR would be involved in subsidiary's employee business. Could somebody enlighten me a bit?

The company I work for is owned by Fuji Xerox and all HR goes through them, not us

 

[J-Skee]

If the accusations are found to be true, what does this mean for Naughty Dog's legacy? They're known as one of the best developers in the industry. Would we codemn them for one person's actions?

 

[III-V]

If the accusations are found to be true, what does this mean for Naughty Dog's legacy? They're known as one of the best developers in the industry. Would we codemn them for one person's actions?

It all comes down to who knew what. If there was a sleazy attempt at a coverup with bothe Sony and ND protecting a lead for his horrible actions, then yea, that’s problematic.

 

[EatChildren]

If the accusations are found to be true, what does this mean for Naughty Dog's legacy? They're known as one of the best developers in the industry. Would we codemn them for one person's actions?

They're also known for notoriously horrendous crunch.

 

[Mechanized]

If the accusations are found to be true, what does this mean for Naughty Dog's legacy? They're known as one of the best developers in the industry. Would we codemn them for one person's actions?

This is what you care about here? Huh? Really? Naughty Dog's legacy.

 

[J-Skee]

They're also known for notoriously horrendous crunch.

I understand that, but I was talking moreso about the quality of the games. I read Blood, Sweat & Pixels. I hate that Bruce Straley was so burned out.

This is what you care about here? Huh? Really? Naughty Dog's legacy.

The Last of Us is one of my favorite games of all time. Am I not going to pick up the sequel because of this situation? I'm with you, it sucks, but it's not that black & white. We're all flawed human beings at the end of the day. Are you going to avoid every single Sony product from now on? It's not that easy. I'm not going to instantly stop playing my PS4 because of this.