Why did Hasbro treat Larian so ♥♥♥♥♥♥?

[Aksolotli]

Why? This game was biggest success stories in long time.

[TaKo]

Originally posted by mutantbeth:

im out of the loop whats this mean? no dlc?

larian has moved on from baldur's gate and will not make any DLC or expansion, they have already started working on their 2 next projects(Patch 7 will be the last major content patch, after that only expect minor updates and bugfixes)

notably the CEO of larian also expressed sadness over how basically all of the WotC staff involved with making BG3 had been fired by WotC/Hasbro by the game's release

since WotC/Hasbro own the IP however they will likely try to milk the franchise after BG3's massive success and they will likely fail

[Bray of Cats]

Originally posted by guard65:

Originally posted by Bray of Cats (N/A):

Capitalism.

It is not exactly capitalism but corporatism. Capitalism has a memory and can look to the future, when managed and regulated property.

Corporatism is like stated, milk anything and everything within our grasp, steal it all for myself and let the rest disparage. Pretty much the same as Oligarchy?

Success or failure mean nothing, only their take in the plot.

Yeah, that excuse gets used a lot, it's only used as a distraction and to confuse people.

[Aksolotli]

Originally posted by mutantbeth:

im out of the loop whats this mean? no dlc?

Hasbro cancelled the deal. More like they treat Larian super ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Now Larian has the Aces in the hand and wont work with Hasbro anymore.

[TaKo]

Originally posted by Aksolotli:

Originally posted by mutantbeth:

im out of the loop whats this mean? no dlc?

Hasbro cancelled the deal. More like they treat Larian super ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Now Larian has the Aces in the hand and wont work with Hasbro anymore.

thats not really it, Larian mainly does not want to be stuck making BG content when they have 2 other projects of their own already under way

hasbro's treatment of the people involved in making the game likely soured relations somewhat but its a secondary reason

[Orion Invictus]

Originally posted by TaKo:

Originally posted by guard65:

It is not exactly capitalism but corporatism.

distinction without a difference

captialism very much does not care about the future in any way that isnt just wanting infinite growth without care for sustainability or feasibility

Like cancer.

[Cass]

Originally posted by Bray of Cats (N/A):

Originally posted by guard65:

It is not exactly capitalism but corporatism. Capitalism has a memory and can look to the future, when managed and regulated property.

Corporatism is like stated, milk anything and everything within our grasp, steal it all for myself and let the rest disparage. Pretty much the same as Oligarchy?

Success or failure mean nothing, only their take in the plot.

Yeah, that excuse gets used a lot, it's only used as a distraction and to confuse people.

It's how people who are ideologically glued to capitalism deal with the fact that they keep seeing capitalism ruining things.

[AsianGirlLover]

Greed, as per usual, ruins what could have been a beautiful, sustainable thing.

[NeeLot]

Originally posted by Aksolotli:

Hasbro cancelled the deal. More like they treat Larian super ♥♥♥♥♥♥. Now Larian has the Aces in the hand and wont work with Hasbro anymore.

What kind of deal did Hasbro cancel? Larian got a license to make BG3, they made it and then moved on.

[Berlin]

Am I in the right place? This is the discussion group for my political philosophy course, right?

[Bray of Cats]

Originally posted by Berlin:

Am I in the right place? This is the discussion group for my political philosophy course, right?

I'm here to roleplay as a magic cat who lives in a bunker with a part chicken, part beaver, part dragon, man. We can do your thing though, warning I am full of ♥♥♥♥.

[Cosgar]

Originally posted by Bray of Cats (N/A):

Capitalism.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Berlin:

Am I in the right place? This is the discussion group for my political philosophy course, right?

You realize you're in a steam forum right?

[Scarecrow]

Originally posted by TaKo:

Originally posted by Scarecrow:

and even their shareholders.

considering every stupid short-sighted decision they(and really every other company) make is to generate profit and pelase their shareholders this is a funny thing to say

Since I am a shareholder, and they haven't really generated enough ROI for me, I can honestly say they've treated me badly.

[TaKo]

Originally posted by Scarecrow:

Since I am a shareholder, and they haven't really generated enough ROI for me, I can honestly say they've treated me badly.

feel like its common practices to mean "major % shareholders whose money holds considerable sway over the company in question, who tho not always but often are not even individuals but rather other organizations entirely" when people mention/discuss shareholders

not the many joe shmoes who invested a few hundred to a few thousand bucks each and hold no sway over whatever they've invested in, no offense of course

like, they are answering to the major firms responsible for the hundreds of millions of dollars in investments each, not you

[Quillithe]

Originally posted by Scarecrow:

Originally posted by TaKo:

considering every stupid short-sighted decision they(and really every other company) make is to generate profit and pelase their shareholders this is a funny thing to say

Since I am a shareholder, and they haven't really generated enough ROI for me, I can honestly say they've treated me badly.

I dunno they've done pretty well YTD and 6 months at least. Not some crazy +300% amount or anything, but pretty solid