I agree, it was a bad move. He's trying to get Soyny to cave to pressure instead of just advising that people refund it. It's a shitty tactic, tbh.

@NEETzsche @LukeAlmighty Rewarding anti-consumer practices by buying a garbage, overpriced console and an overhyped, censored game definitely sounds like a recipe for success.

I guess the question here is if Grummz is just wrong on this one take, and therefore redeemable, or if he's a plant/bad actor.

@NEETzsche @LukeAlmighty My (charitable) read would be that he's still naïve, as well as far too willing to cut game devs some slack, due to his own background as one.

@ChristiJunior @NEETzsche
Well, that kinda makes it worse though.
Yes, it does mean, that he understands what pressures caused devs to break, but that's just back to the good old "we were just following orders" dilemma.

In the end, you have to chose a line and not cross it. He said to cross it slowly. Therefore, he seems to care more about the devs then the customers.

@LukeAlmighty @NEETzsche Something bizarre about GamerGate 1 in general was that for all the talk about it being a Consumer Revolt, the well-being of the devs always seemed to be prioritized over the well-being of the consumers, which was even behind the idiotic anti-boycott stance.

Yeah, it's called a conflict of interest, and Grummz has one. He can't represent both devs and customers when their interests are at odds, so these scenarios are where push comes to shove.

@ChristiJunior @LukeAlmighty @NEETzsche He wants the game to succeed because it has a cute protag and if it does well the devs live to dev another day. OTOH Sony are being queers because they hate anything that isn't ugly