Looks like ol' Rupie wants to get into video games...

[crv]

EA or Activision could become a part of Murdoch's News Corp. borg...

Read here:
http://ps2.ign.com/articles/579/579483p1.html

[Shane R. Monroe]

And people said I was crazy ...

[jamcat]

I don't see the big deal. It's all business. Video games have become an entertainment media like TV, movies, radio, etc. So why shouldn't the same thing that happens to TV, radio, and movies, happen to games as well. Again, business as usual, no big deal. Why bitch about it. Gamers should have expected this to happen when video gaming went mainstream.

What people should really be upset about is the break up of Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston. Like, oh my god, this is worse than the EA issue! How can this happen! Come on people, we need to put a web petition together to get Brad & Jenn back together. EA is nothing compared to this. :)

[WorknMan]

I don't see the big deal. It's all business.

Well, that's nice rhetoric, until you wake up one day and there's one or two corporations that own everything, including you. Hell, they're already patenting genes, so why not?

[Shane R. Monroe]

You cannot convince jamcat that what is happening is detrimental to our way of life. But like you said, eventually it will come around to him (and all the other non-believers) and they will figure it out.

[DaMenace]

Maybe they will, maybe they wont.. but one should never lose faith in sheepism!

[jamcat]

"You cannot convince jamcat that what is happening is detrimental to our way of life."

Please tell me how in the world 1 or 2 corporations owning the entire video game industry would be detrimental to life? Gaming today has pretty much gone to hell in a hand basket. 1 or 2 corporations owning it all isn't going to make a difference. The ONLY people who are affected by this EA thing are the video game sports geeks. That's it. For those of us who don't give a $#!t about EA, football, or sports in general, the issue means nothing.

As for other media, I wouldn't care. I don't watch enough TV to care about who owns the networks. I don't listen to the radio, so it doesn't matter there. And I don't care what corporations run the movie industry. As long as they don't stop making sci-fi, action, and adventure movies, I'm a happy camper.

Painting this doom & gloom picture of corporations doing a "Resident Evil" is just being paranoid. That has about as much chance of happening as the chances of aliens invading Earth or Jesus returning. It just isn't going to happen.

[Demolition Man]

jamcat, if the sci-fi, action, and adventure movies start having sucky storylines, bad FX, etc etc etc... would you then start caring?

[jamcat]

"jamcat, if the sci-fi, action, and adventure movies start having sucky storylines, bad FX, etc etc etc... would you then start caring?"

Probably not. Cheesy stories & effects can be funny & entertaining as well. Again, I'm not like Shane where every effect has to be seemless or the story has to keep me from pressing the "I believe" button.

[Shane R. Monroe]

So, jamcat ... what DO you care about? Anything? What do you do other than post here? What if your job was absorbed? Do you have ANY livelyhood for the world to crap on?

What a dreary existance.

[WorknMan]

Please tell me how in the world 1 or 2 corporations owning the entire video game industry would be detrimental to life?

I am not talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning the video game industry - I am talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning EVERYTHING, as in ALL industries, and governments.

[jamcat]

Other than animals? No. Hey, the world is always crapping on the retail field. But I give back what I get. If a customer wants to be a @$$hole to me, I'm a @$$hole right back.

Why is it dreary to not care? Why the hell should I stress myself out worrying about meaningless crap like EA or Microsoft? What they do makes for interesting news. But beyond that, I don't care.

"I am not talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning the video game industry - I am talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning EVERYTHING, as in ALL industries, and governments."

Hey, that's fine by me. I wouldn't see a problem with it.

[WorknMan]

Why is it dreary to not care? Why the hell should I stress myself out worrying about meaningless crap like EA or Microsoft? What they do makes for interesting news. But beyond that, I don't care.

In the case of video games, I don't care either. In fact, they could stop making video games altogether and it wouldn't bother me much. It's just not that important to me. However, I see it more an indication of what's going on in the rest of the corporate world - smaller companies being assimilated by giant corporations in a Borg-like manner. It's just not a good thing, generaly speaking.


"I am not talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning the video game industry - I am talking about 1 or 2 corporations owning EVERYTHING, as in ALL industries, and governments."

Hey, that's fine by me. I wouldn't see a problem with it.

Well, what happens in any particular market when one corporation rules the roost with little-to-no competition? Generally, it's higher prices and lower quality. So, imagine what happens when some corporation takes over the police force, and then decides it's no longer profitable to patrol in your neighborhood anymore. Not like you can get another corporation to do it if there's only one.
The reason why this is bad is because corporations as whole have no moral conscience whatsoever - whether good or bad, they will simply do whatever makes them the most money. This is ok as long as their power is limited ...

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

I fear a world where if i want entertainment i have to go through M$.

Why is that bad? Cause M$ makes a crappy product. Jamcat has to agree he misses the days when a piece of software came out for the 8 bit computers it wasn't beta (or in M$ case, alpha's posing as betas) but solid products that didn't crash or lock up your machine or cause you to think you've lost your mind. Sure, it was perfect, there was probably about 20% of the industry that had buggy software but now its the exact opposite, its 20% solid software, 80% buggy or beta. I dont want to end up in a world that when I plug in my dvd player to watch a movie, it crashes or randomly disappears half way through cause of crappy M$ DRM that is now the norm in EVERYTHING. I don't want my TV Cable or Satellite service showing more snow or when i turn on Channel 2 i get Channel 8 cause of M$ buggy software thats still "in beta". I don't want my internet connection to be down for days at a time cause M$ owns my ISP and they a spread thin trying to get other things to work that internet service is the least of their problems. I want my phone to work but probably be getting phone calls for the neighbors cause once again, M$ is screwing with my phone lines again. Anything programable is up for grabs for M$. Imagine your microwave oven being made by M$ and it blows up cause if you type in a combination of numbers it sets off random bug #1958 on their list of known problems?

You are going, Bryan, you are crazy, it could never happen. Well its starting to happen now and Jamcat, you dont care. It's ok to live in a world where things don't quite work the way they should. We should just learn to deal with it.

I don't want Wal-Mart being my only supplier of durable goods.

Do you really think Wal-Mart is going to stay insanely cheap once they've run everyone else out of town and have taken control of the free market here in the US? I have 5 Wal-Marts here in Reno. Why do 500,000 people need 5 Wal-Marts? You are right, we don't. They've already built one Super Wal-Mart and they have a Sams Club right next to it. So pretty soon, if i want groceries, gas or durable goods, its all Wal-Mart. That might be Jam-cat's way and the Wal-Mart way, but not my way. I love a competive marketplace where if I don't like the quality of price of something i can go somewhere else. Based on Jamcat's theory, its ok for there to be only one person owning everything. Whats going to give Wal-Mart the incentive to provide fresh fruit and vegitables when they own all the farms? And in a world run by Wal-Mart they can go, "we expected 5 more oranges to grow than last week, therefore, orange juice will be $15 a carton". But again, thats fine with Jamcat, he can deal.

Well Jamcat, you are the minority here. We don't want a world like that. Why do we sit here and worry about it? Cause day in and day out one of these big corporations are doing little sneaky **** to slowly take marketshare. A 1/2 % ownership of this, product dumping of that. Its not going to be one major thing, its going to continue to be itty bitty little things until one day you will wake up (like most people did 10 years ago this September) and go, "Woah, how in the hell did we let M$ take over the computer industry?"

It really is that simple but....you don't care.

[jamcat]

The only thing I miss about the 8-bit computer days was the VARIETY of gaming software available. These days it's pretty much FPS games and that's it.

"Cause day in and day out one of these big corporations are doing little sneaky **** to slowly take marketshare. A 1/2 % ownership of this, product dumping of that."

That's what corporations do. It's called business. Do you think people like Bill Gates or say Donald Trump get where they are by playing nice? I doubt it. If I were in Gates or Trump's shoes, I'd do the same thing too to build my empire. Buy-outs, take-overs, product dumping, whatever it takes to stay #1 or have the most market share. It's all a part of running a business.

If one mega-ultra-corp runs everything, then hey, so be it. That's business. I can deal with it.

[Danny]

now now shane... Jamcat dose care about something!... telling other people that he does not care :D

[WorknMan]

If one mega-ultra-corp runs everything, then hey, so be it. That's business. I can deal with it.

IMHO, I think he's trolling.

[jamcat]

Honestly I don't care if Microsoft "ruled the world". Like everybody else, Shane is entitled to express his opinions & dislike of whatever corporations. But running around like Chicken Little and going on about far fetched dooms day "Resident Evil" results if Microsoft (or whoever) ran everything is just being flat out paranoid & silly.

When it comes to "evil corporations", I picture Shane like one of those extreme religious guys you see on the street corner every now and then, holding a big "THE END IS NEAR" sign on a stick. It's amusing to see, but nobody takes it seriously or pays much attention 'cause it's not gonna happen. It's like when people were yapping that the world was going to be thrown into chaos because computers were going to shut down and stop working over the Y2K thing. Did that happen? No. People were just being paranoid and silly. It's the same thing with people like Shane yapping about these so-called "evil corporations" running everything will be the downfall of mankind and society, blah blah blah, yada yada yada.

I think Shane just does it for show. The "Single Angry Man Against The Corporation". Nothing wrong with that. Every show needs a hook. It's amusing and entertaining to listen to one man's "rage against the corporations", but I don't take it seriously because the doom & gloom picture Shane paints on the issue is never going to happen. And since it's never going to happen, why bother to care or give a damn? I don't.

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

jamcat...why do you listen to the show and post here then? Is it something you cant resist and the only way to make you stop is to ban you cause we will ban you if thats what you need to be put out of your misery or is it that by acting the way you do you think you are causing a ruckus or fullfilling some kind of control thing you have or does the forums fill that lack of attention you don't get in your real life? I am just majorly confused. What can we here on the forums or the show do to make you not complain so damn much?

[YoshiM]

They can ban because they care. Heheheheh....

Jamcat seems to be a "go with the flow" kinda person. Y'know, I'd love to be that way: hum through life without a care. Problem is, I can't. I worked for a company who was once a pretty big insurance solutions house, started in the US with offices nationwide. They are now reduced to a couple offices and are owned by a company out of Canada. Why? Corporate greed, plain and simple. Once the company went public they started buying up smaller companies to get software that was related to the core company's products. I think we had like 6 offices before the axe started swinging. The company made substandard products as programmers were spread pretty thin on MANY platforms. We started losing customers but instead of trying to shore up problems the axe kept swinging. When the shareholders got upset, they let the CEO go (who drove to the main office to pick up his cool million severance check in his Porsche) but everything continued to fall. The original "home office" in my home town had floors leased and by the end of 2002 the staff of about 100 programmers, techs and other staff was reduced to about 34 and moved to half of a floor a few blocks away in a mult-office complex. The techs were then let go after the company was absorbed.

Who suffered? The employees that got laid off, the customers whose "solutions" were no longer supported (but they could upgrade at a very nominal cost!) with an overall increase in costs to THEIR customers or a possible reduction of staff to remain competive to those who are larger or not affected by the buyout. Because of the nature of the business (insurance) it possibly might have or could have affected us.

The Wal-Mart bit Bryan metioned is a great example. I live in a city of about 50,000 people. We have one Wal-Mart with another only about 10 minutes away. There are plans drawn up to replace that Wal-Mart with two Super Wal-Marts: one on the south side of town and the other on the north side. Same size, same features. For a city of 50K that also has a ShopKo, a Target, and a (albeit ghetto) K-Mart and about 4 major grocery stores (2 Piggly Wigglys and two Pick and Save/Roundy's). The "sell cheap to eliminate competition" is well known (for sure with their pharmacy) and they won't stop. "Doing business" is one thing but "undercutting to dominate" is another and goes against the ideas of the free market. As Bryan said, what's to stop Wal-Mart from jacking prices up if there is no competition (which again what they have done in the case of their pharmacy in some areas)? People are creatures of convenience. Not many will shop elsewhere and pay more due to principal. Hence the many plantings of Wal-Mart seeds.

[Spin]

Wal-mart is the Microsoft of retail.
I loathe them and I can think of no better way to explain what they inflict up the masses.
The analogy is truly too easy not to notice!
The masses simply feed their own demise. "SAD"

Spin

[Bryan 'KidHype' Smith]

Wal-Mart has a swallow your neighborhood whole mentality. They prey on towns that have businesses that can't afford to match Wal-Mart prices. Human logic tells you that cheaper is better, especially when its the exact same thing thats being marked up 150% at your local retailer. Wal-Mart is one borg you can't simply beat by not shopping there. When local businesses see the first brick being laid at a new Wal-Mart, they shut down but what can you do? You still need a hammer, you still need clothes, you still need the things that Wal-Mart sells at insanely low prices and Wal-Marts are like Mc Donalds, they are everywhere. I still grocery shop at regular grocery stores here in town but whenever i need something that i would normally go to a speciality store or mall (shudder, mall) i would rather go to Wal-Mart. I am just not rich enough to pay a 150% mark-up on stuff.

Wal-Mart sucks but in this case there was no way in hell we could have stopped them from existing.

[Shane R. Monroe]

Its really no different with Microsoft. Symantec is just overly optimistic thinking that people will continue to BUY protection from them when MS starts giving it away for free.

[Yodaporn]

Jamcat, I dont know you, I dont know your life story, but Ive heard simalar things from other people, and all of these people were pre-teen to teenagers, and anyone with no bills, no rent, and generaly not much to worry about losing. The reason why your atitude is ruffuling feathers is because most of us do have alot of stuff to worry about, rent prices, grocery prices, and just the general cost of living. To hear the sound of someone not caring about what happens to your way of life, is like watching too guys wearing suits that are worth more than my first car run for president, each one trying to tell me they understand the working class.

I think you may have skiped over the big point of the hatered of the giganto-companys; when all the buyouts, takeovers, and market crushings are done, all the promises that were laid down by these companys on the way up, all the low prices, and the freebes, are going to go poof. Prices are going to sky rocket, and every little thing is going to cost a little bit. Why? You will then have nowhere else to turn to, and they will know this. Care 'bout that?

[Gamemaster_ca_2003]

We Might now know which company Mr. Murdoch is after.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/02/23/news_6119049.html

[devilshed]

If it does take Eidos, I wonder what effects it will have.

layoffs, cancelation of games, a surge of crappy ones, I wonder.

[Nectar]

Eidos has been on a downslide for years. The last Tomb Raider game got horrible reviews and the Legacy of Cain series has gotten progressively worse with each release. I haven't played any of the Hitman games but it seems they are already just milking it for all its worth. Add that to the recent closing of ION Storm and those god-awful backyard wrestling games and it seems this buyout may be a positive thing.

Of course, if it was a company I actually cared about then my opinion would be different but beyond Deus Ex and publishing Sword of Berserk on DC, Eidos means nothing to me anymore.

[Chewchilla]

Rumor Control time!

From GameSpot:
RUMOR: Eidos is not being bought by News Corporation after all.
Source: A very well placed source at a major game company.
The official story: See below.

What we heard: This week began with everyone in the UK but the Queen confirming that Rupert Murdoch's right-leaning media empire was scooping up the house that Lara Croft built. Then a source we'll call "Deep Throat"--in honor of the Watergate informant, not the porno movie--contacted us with news that Eidos had indeed been acquired. However, s/he said that Fox News' corporate parent was not the buyer. Instead, the source laid out a scenario already covered in RC where Elevation Partners, the venture capital fund started by ex-EA president John Riccitiello and which features U2 lead singer Bono on its board, bought the ailing publisher. Supposedly, Elevation acquired a chunk of its shares through the UK holding company Schroders, which owns 21 percent of Eidos. Problem is, when contacted by GameSpot, Schroders didn't know what we were talking about. "I can confirm that we have made no significant changes to our position to Eidos in the last couple of months," said a rep for the company. As for Elevation, they aren't commenting at all. "Unfortunately, Elevation is in a quiet period related to fund raising," said a polite-but-tightlipped company official. "We cannot comment on any matter related to the fund."

Bogus or not bogus?: Seeing how News Corporation isn't even commenting, even that part of the Eidos saga is still officially bogus.