Going by the description it is comically cartoon racism and embezzlement.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Escapist's clarification on their sources for the Star Citizen op-ed
- Thread starter Last Hearth
- Start date
Going by the description it is comically cartoon racism and embezzlement.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
This.
These "anonymous source" office politics articles take advantage of the reader's LACK of knowledge about the scope and extent of the source's knowledge.
This allows them to air their perceptions, or their grudges or grievances with an air of assumed truth, and grants them way more power and influence than all the people who face liability by standing by what they say.
If there were budget numbers and facts to report, that's one thing, but a swishy hit piece including personality judgments and messy allegations that his wife influenced hiring practices etc etc... none of this is provable, factual information.
It is literally office politics.
bonesmccoy
Banned
In the business they call this Going Full Breitbart
porkchopexpress
Member
Some of the discussions were over email, I could easily see someone cutting and pasting the email they sent to the reporter on glassdoor with a minimum amount of editing. I can also see the reporter cutting and pasting from the emails into the story with a minimum amount of editing.
I'm not commenting on the soundness of the story mind you; but the scenario where this could happen is very plausible I think.
I don't really want to get involved in this debate or discussion or whatever but this is just about everything you need to know. "Anonymous Sources" are the worst type of sources for any journalistic piece and should always be used when you have hard evidence to back them up. Example:
"I work for the government at Area 51 and I tell you they are experimenting on Aliens. In fact, on this date they transported three aliens to X facility and began scans of the Alien's craft."
Now, would you run a story like this from an anonymous source without any other information? Let's say that at best you can verify he works for the military, is that enough? Obviously not. If your going to make very serious claims then you better have some serious evidence to back it up beyond, "some guy told me this, no I can't tell you his name."
Also, to play Devil's Advocate, I believe this is possible. When I relay a story to someone I inevitably end up using the same words and examples when I really said story to another person. And, if I was speaking to a journalist laying out accusations that would go in print I wouldn't just "free ball" it. I'd have my thoughts collected, organized, and laid out which inevitably means I'd likely have them typed.
Folks getting way too tied up in the wrong things here. The he-said-she-said is a tempest in a teapot. What folks should be talking about is that The Escapist is standing by two very bold claims:
1) There's a climate of sexual and racial harassment at CiG.
2) Embezzlement and fraud have and are taking place at CiG.
Problem is, The Escapist has made public charges on extremely flimsy evidence. "An anonymous source told me that embezzlement took place right in front of them" is laughable corroboration.
You wanna do an article on hinky things going on at CiG? Go right ahead. Write an article with unverified claims of criminal activity? That's a hell of a Pandora's Box that The Escapist has just opened.
1) There's a climate of sexual and racial harassment at CiG.
2) Embezzlement and fraud have and are taking place at CiG.
Problem is, The Escapist has made public charges on extremely flimsy evidence. "An anonymous source told me that embezzlement took place right in front of them" is laughable corroboration.
You wanna do an article on hinky things going on at CiG? Go right ahead. Write an article with unverified claims of criminal activity? That's a hell of a Pandora's Box that The Escapist has just opened.
ScatheZombie
Member
Everything makes more sense if we stop calling them journalists and start calling them bloggers again.
Which, inadvertently, answers this question quite clearly.
I can't see how you can doubt the credibility of the sources (as in that they worked there).
You can doubt the one who posted on glassdoor. But the article is based not on 1, but on 9 independent sources who say the same thing.
Saying they are not credible because they didn't publish the sources names sounds stupid to me. Of course a whistle-blower wouldn't want his name published. If it happens, he will be in real trouble, possibly even serious legal trouble for breaking NDA's. It is also obvious to me that anyone who will be saying good things about the company will not share the same fear - so he will reveal his name freely.
IMHO the part that is worth discussing is the actual content of the article. Most of it sounds like the complaints of (real) disgruntled ex-employees. It looks like they don't share Robert's vision and management philosophy. They didn't fit in the company and left or were fired.
Their reports of the company's financial status does seem credible to me. A "regular" AAA game by a well established studio that already has tools/game engines/teams costs ~100m$ to make. Meeting the ambitious goals of star citizen, with a newly formed company, on a 90m$ budget looks nearly impossible to me. I don't think its due to mismanagement or such, but simply due to the very ambitious scope of the game they are trying to make.
Edit:
For example AC:black flag is estimated to cost ~100m$, AC:unity estimated by imdb to cost ~150m$. And that's a yearly installment in an established series by a big and established studio.
You can doubt the one who posted on glassdoor. But the article is based not on 1, but on 9 independent sources who say the same thing.
Saying they are not credible because they didn't publish the sources names sounds stupid to me. Of course a whistle-blower wouldn't want his name published. If it happens, he will be in real trouble, possibly even serious legal trouble for breaking NDA's. It is also obvious to me that anyone who will be saying good things about the company will not share the same fear - so he will reveal his name freely.
IMHO the part that is worth discussing is the actual content of the article. Most of it sounds like the complaints of (real) disgruntled ex-employees. It looks like they don't share Robert's vision and management philosophy. They didn't fit in the company and left or were fired.
Their reports of the company's financial status does seem credible to me. A "regular" AAA game by a well established studio that already has tools/game engines/teams costs ~100m$ to make. Meeting the ambitious goals of star citizen, with a newly formed company, on a 90m$ budget looks nearly impossible to me. I don't think its due to mismanagement or such, but simply due to the very ambitious scope of the game they are trying to make.
Edit:
For example AC:black flag is estimated to cost ~100m$, AC:unity estimated by imdb to cost ~150m$. And that's a yearly installment in an established series by a big and established studio.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
Truly the reason the people who created that engine always got a free pass here in gaf amirite?
Disgruntled employees shitposting about their workplace is hardly evidence. Even if there wasn't a campaign to burn this game to the ground led by a narcissistic weasel looking to sell his own shit game, its still just the word of an unhappy, anonymous, person. Embezzlement and racism are pretty serious allegations, some proof is in order. Extensive knowledge regarding the financials (Which Derek Smart has been trying to force from CIG) would be required to make any serious claim. An artist isn't even going to have that information, much less Chris Roberts' personal financials.
Ultimately the story is entirely one sided and really offers no view of the other side (not counting Roberts' response). At best its 7 out of 261 employees given a microphone to say whatever they wanted without having to expose their identity or prvide any proof of the more serious allegations.
That's speculation. And completely ignores Chris Roberts' response to that. Credible, would be, at the very least, proving the person making the allegations did indeed have access to, not only all of CIGs financial records, but Chris Roberts' personal financial records as well. You are just pulling numbers for different games, which are at best estimates, and saying that's proof of something. How is that in any way credible?
Ultimately the story is entirely one sided and really offers no view of the other side (not counting Roberts' response). At best its 7 out of 261 employees given a microphone to say whatever they wanted without having to expose their identity or prvide any proof of the more serious allegations.
That's speculation. And completely ignores Chris Roberts' response to that. Credible, would be, at the very least, proving the person making the allegations did indeed have access to, not only all of CIGs financial records, but Chris Roberts' personal financial records as well. You are just pulling numbers for different games, which are at best estimates, and saying that's proof of something. How is that in any way credible?
Absoludacrous
Member
The fact that this story came directly on the heels of that letter from CIG to Smart should be enough for anyone to question all this.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Escapist is the new Fat Babies
You talk about games made by one of the biggest publisher worldwide. Their games are developped in 2-3 years by almost a thousand people (and a dozen of studios). When you look at RSI, they are 260+ on 4 studios and a 2-year development at the moment. You may think they are still quite good if they managed the money properly.
If you look at a closer competition, you may say Rockstar North with GTA, but it's still $265M+ for 5 years with 360+ employees but for a game which is heavily story focused (lot of scenario/acting/realisation), with a world quite big and heavily detailed and one of the biggest marekting campaign ever for a videogame (estimated for 50% of the budget).
So again, RSI may have "a lot" of money reserve for the moment.
The personal attacks against Roberts and his wife seem like "office rumors\politics" to me. Rumors that are repeated in the article by the ex-employees who have a grudge against Roberts. So I don't find those credible. Not necessarily false, but not credible either.
What I am referring to is the financial state of the company. You don't need access to financial reports to know your company is in deep financial trouble. While it is still not fact, as you will need photocopies of financial documents for this, I find the allegations regarding the company's financial state to be believable especially when taking the budgets of current AAA games into consideration. Another reason is that in this case they do mention specific numbers - 82m$ spent, numbers which Robert does not address/refute directly in his response.
Since this is a crowdfunded project I would expect Robert to publish at least partial financial data about the company to the public - which would easily put all these rumors to rest. But AFAIK he doesn't.
So basically it's all speculations until Roberts publishes some kind of "hard data", which he will obviously won't do if any of the allegations are true.
Edit: Basically if it were a regular private company i would say the burden of proof lies on the sources. But since it is a crowdfunded project i think that the backers are entitled to have some basic information (as in numbers, not a statement from roberts saying everything is perfectly fine)about the financial well being of the project that they backed.
randomengine
Banned
I support the escapist until I hear otherwise.
Dictator93
Member
Well, um, uh
Dude maybe he has selective blindness. Terrible illness.
He said that they have more than $8m in reserve and $90m is not the all money they gathered.
They also stated multiple times, in many interviews, that even if funding stopped 'today' they would be able to finish the game.
What other proof do You need really?
br0ken_shad0w
Member
Just got to wait for the eventual lawsuit.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Except the Escapist says the source who said the part that's the same as what's on Glassdoor did not exchange any emails with them. CS1 is a source that was only contacted via phone.
I dont think CIG will pursuit with lawsuit, but next email to Escapist from CIG's Ortwin Freyermuth is more than certain.
That's what I added in the edit: actual numbers rather than "their numbers are false (it's not 8, it's 8.1) and everything is fine". The response i would like would be: 82 spent and 8 remaining is false, here are the real (approximate) numbers: X spent, Y remaining (Z required to complete the game).
Also, my first point was that I see no reason to doubt the escapist's or the sources credibility (in the sense that they worked in CIG). It seems more reasonable to me that those are 9 angry ex-employees rather than saying there was some sort of conspiracy among the 9 or that the escapist is lying on purpose. If you want to complain about the escapist , I would complain about being unprofessional by publishing the personal slants in the article as well.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
All too familiar. It's an irresponsible clickbait tactic and multiple publications are guilty of it.
http://kotaku.com/5955223/what-went-wrong-with-silicon-knights-x-men-destiny
http://www.polygon.com/2014/3/6/5474722/why-did-irrational-close-bioshock-infinite
AC games are developed across 10(or more) studios with 1000+man teams. Calling that "regular" is basically saying there are less than 5 AAA IPs remaining in the market total.Costia said:
The one cost-comment that can be reasoned about from outside is the - the 3.5M monthly-burn rate, which sounds pretty likely given their size. Of course, that doesn't say much about their combined spend or cash on-hand.
First of all releasing their financial would only be good if they were going to be viewed rationally. Derek is out for blood and will almost certainly find something to cling to even if its nothing. That's further complicated by the general public's willingness to believe the very worst about crowd funding and running a business. Its why game development is kept secret, we can't handle it.
Again, without a detailed accounting there is no way to prove ANYTHING in the article. Someone said $82 million, great, means nothing without something to corroborate.
This is a laughable statement in light that smooth game development is the exception, not the rule.
I just picked AC since i found the numbers quickly, you can look for other games. Just keep in mind that star citizen's scope (in detail, size and game-play elements and mechanics) is supposed to be huge, much bigger than most current AAA titles (which in a lot of cases also rely on existing technology and assets owned by the parent company).
I, and i believe that most of the public as well, don't care about Derek. So those numbers will be viewed rationally. while obviously there will still be skeptics, i think it would have been enough for the vast majority of people and would have put these rumors to rest.
As long as no financial documents are posted there is no proof, only speculation based on people's testimonies - and you can choose who you want to believe.
Messofanego
Banned
Smooth game development is pretty rare, though, so that's not really a story.
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
That's not how filters work.
Perhaps... but seeing this much dirty laundry being aired out for all to see is not an usual sight in AAA development... and it also doesn't exactly inspire confidence on getting a quality end product.
There has never been a AAA game like Star Citizen. Crowdfunding in general brings out some awful people and Star Citizen is a lightning rod for their bullshit.
I'm not saying it can't be true or the game will absolutely turn out fine. But this article is pretty lousy and these sources should have been properly vetted.
See You in next saturday's SC thread.
Dictator93
Member
Have you seen all the clean laundry that Star Citizen has aired? Every day of the week for about 2 years? Perhaps you should look around a bit, it might inform you r opinion a bit more.
ScatheZombie
Member
I worked for a company that did livestreams from inside the studio multiple times a week too. Hell, I was on a couple of them. The outside viewer still doesn't know how the sausage is made or 99% of what actually goes on inside the studio.
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
The trial never ended Mon Capitán.
I know, it all seems a bit shady. But then again, where there's smoke, there's fire.
Excellent... I'll mark it on my calendar!
I admit I haven't been following things in great detail, but I do have a passing interest in the whole situation, so I picked on a thing or two on the way.. My opinion is how we're dealing with a developer that got far more money than expected from the crowdfunding campaigns, which compromised their original vision while their ambition grew unchecked, hence the delays. It's impossible to say whether I'm right since we have no conclusive evidence, but my gut feeling says this story won't have a happy ending...
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
Stop repeating this tired analogy when what we're talking about is someone's ability to use the media to anonymously throw smoke bombs.
But it's one of my favorites... gave me the edge I needed too many times to dismiss it so easily...
Besides, not even smoke bombs are flung around without any reason... dismissing the whole thing is equally unwise as proclaiming the game is hopelessly doomed. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle... I just lean a bit more towards the negative outcome.