• Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        212·
        16 hours ago

        You’re probably right that it’s weird. I think most of my amusement comes from the way that those of us who are powerless delude ourselves into believing that we can be powerful - but no matter how you count it, zero times two is still zero. And I’ve just realized, they probably won’t hire that many contractors, they’ll test out LLM slop first. If it sells ads at the same rate, they’ll “phase out” the human side over time. The corp ideals will put profits over people, always. They’ll take the obvious path, because they care about one metric: profit.

        • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          9 hours ago

          If people were powerless to the whims of a corporation, Kinda Funny wouldn’t exist, but if you believe you’re powerless, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

          • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
            12·
            8 hours ago

            I’ve never heard of that company. What’s their quarterly ad revenue? I don’t mean their minor hobby nonsense on Patreon or the scraps they get from Google & Amazon, I mean direct ad rev from studios or the like. Also, what’s their average visibility on Metacritic? Do they get counted as a “professional” outlet with pull quotes, or are they in a category that doesn’t count?

            • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4·
              7 hours ago

              See, that’s just it. This entire business doesn’t survive on ad revenue anymore. Everything that isn’t Gamespot and IGN have folded, because the money that used to be there in ads isn’t there anymore. Subscriptions are what keep companies like this sustainable and afloat. Kinda Funny came from former IGN employees, and they knew the power they had to bring their audience to them rather than surrendering to the whims of IGN. Digital Foundry, Giant Bomb, Video Games Chronicle, MinnMax, GamesBeat, Aftermath…they all transitioned to doing this.

              • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
                1·
                7 hours ago

                Oh. Good for them, I guess. I’ve never heard of them. Heck, the only one of those i ever heard about was Giant Bomb, and what I knew was that they died and got rebooted.

                I guess it’s a good thing that some people are willing to whale for media figures. I won’t bother, because I don’t give enough meaningful data to be part of a valuable product in the older world - then again, I also still watch TV by antenna and listen to terrestrial radio most of the time.

                  • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
                    1·
                    5 hours ago

                    I’ve already paid for it. I bought a TV, a radio, multiple computers, and I pay a subscription (much to my chagrin) to access the Internet and the Web. And yes, I have looked into the cost of a single-purchase backbone, but it didn’t work out in my favor.

        • NewDayRocks@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          8·
          13 hours ago

          Question for you - what do you think produces the profit for IGN? Is it the quality of their content or just their branding?

          Are they too big to fail? That no matter what content they put out it will continue to produce the same profit regardless of how good it is?

          Do you believe that a contractor at lower salary and benefits armed with AI will be able to handle the 2-3x workload that current employees are doing at comparable competency?

          Do you believe that IGN will also be backfill all these positions that suddenly opened up and provide training without suffering a noticeable dip in productivity?

          If you believe all that then sure, these employees have little to no power. Let’s see if IGN shares this sentiment and, if they do, let’s see if it works out for them.

          • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
            2·
            11 hours ago

            I have a very dim view of their content and that of their staff past and present. That’s just a note to begin with, so my own bias is clear. IGN isn’t an independent reviewer, they’ll gladly say anything that gives them ad rev - and the few times that they don’t need to cozy up to a certain publisher, you get scores like their infamous God Hand review, which is wildly inaccurate. They’re in the business of marketing and advertising, not meaningfully independent journalism.

            I believe that they’re big enough that the games industry executive teams believe they’re too big to fail, and they will continue to receive ad rev as long as they keep Metacritic scores where the publisher wishes them to be. I believe that the “AAA” studios are deluded into thinking that there’s any relevance to review scores that aren’t the Steam reviews from 6 months after the game releases, or the appropriate storefront page per platform. That group of greed-driven suits are their real audience, not the people who aren’t paying. Remember - if you aren’t paying, you’re the product.

            I do believe that they will be able to have a contractor write a prompt along the lines of, “Write a 1500 word article in the style of IGN’s game reporting based on [game press package], which will lead the reader to consider a score of [x] to be justified.”, yes. And as long as it keeps the Metacritic score where the publisher is happy, the ad rev rolls in.

            And that’s all that matters to them. Only if the ads stop selling will they even begin to take notice.