Live data from Hacker News

Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

twitter.com

41–50 of 115 posts

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's popular to hate Sweeney and Epic within the gaming community at the moment.

Because they've done a very shitty thing.

Have exclusives on their store, or something else?

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#42

Epic CEO says a lot of stuff he doesn’t mean or live up to.

Even if that is true, they are at least on the record now with a position and I do feel like that is important. I would hope to see other game companies make these statements as well.

[deleted]

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#43

Epic CEO says a lot of stuff he doesn’t mean or live up to.

Even if that is true, they are at least on the record now with a position and I do feel like that is important. I would hope to see other game companies make these statements as well.

If EPIC backtracks on something their CEO said, it wouldn’t be the first time. Tim Sweeney consistently makes a fool of himself and his statements turn out to be completely false pretty often. I wouldn’t take anything he says either seriously or as an actual position of the company.

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#44
post #32
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a real risk for just saying something at this point. Thus lip-service like this is itself more than "just lip service".

I'm a total cynic, and do not care about video games or sports, but this does seem like he's taking on a legitimate financial risk in lieu of all the articles bubbling up about the situation

It is telling / sad that just what we might think of as "aw it is just lip service" in the US is in fact a real risk when other countries are involved...

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for correcting me. I see my mistake now. Tencent controls 40% of Epic. Tencent controls 100% of Riot/League of Legends. Epic has no control over Riot/League of Legends.

Tencent controls 100% of Riot/League of Legends As Matt Levine observes, an American company can simply ignore its foreign owner if necessary https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-02-01/citgo-...

that's a very short-term/literal view of the situation. Obviously any American company at the end of the day can physically do what it wants if it resides in the US, but if you want to have long term access to the Chinese market or capital it becomes significantly more of a strategic issue. Just look at the university conflicts in Australia.

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#47
post #39
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What're they going to do? Sell their stake?

They will fire the CEO.

The CEO Tim Sweeney has a majority ownership so can outvote Tencent, and the board is in his favour. It won't happen.

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's popular to hate Sweeney and Epic within the gaming community at the moment.

Because they've done a very shitty thing.

Could you elaborate? I've seen a lot of arguments along those lines, but none were willing to actually explain what it is exactly they're doing that is wrong.

Re: Epic CEO says it won't ban Fortnite players for taking a stance on human rights

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tencent controls 100% of Riot/League of Legends As Matt Levine observes, an American company can simply ignore its foreign owner if necessary https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-02-01/citgo-...

that's a very short-term/literal view of the situation. Obviously any American company at the end of the day can physically do what it wants if it resides in the US, but if you want to have long term access to the Chinese market or capital it becomes significantly more of a strategic issue. Just look at the university conflicts in Australia.

if you want to have long term access to the Chinese market

I think people are starting to cotton on that there is no such thing. The best you can hope is for a few years of getting a local partner familiar with your IP before they boot you out.

Post reply on HN