[keybored]

Anti-unionists are here to tell us that consumers might possibly suffer. Higher prices and delays on a video game. Which has not seen a release in this series in half this century so far.

For all this consumer cares, great. Make it 20% more expensive. Make it 50% more expensive. A hundred. If that helps the greater union cause I can take more walks in the woods to pass the time instead.

[matchbok3]

What a luxury you have to spend so much money on things, then. Hint: most people don't live that way.

[fodkodrasz]

Well, given that computer games are not essential goods, most people could survive perfectly well without these so-called luxuries. Or is it only fairly produced luxury goods that are considered a luxury, while exploitatively produced luxury goods are simply treated as the standard way people live?

[vouwfietsman]

Hint: maybe they would if they would unionize themselves.

[moondance]

In other words: people are entitled to cheap entertainment, but the people who labor to produce that entertainment aren’t entitled to good working conditions. Boo

[thrance]

It's extremely dishonest to frame it as "if workers get good working conditions then consumers suffer". The reality is that Rockstar is extremely profitable. The crunch they impose on their devs with every single release shouldn't be tolerated, and I stand in full support of the unionized workers.

And if a product requires human suffering to be so cheap, then maybe it shouldn't be so cheap.

[keybored]

Most people haven’t had the luxury of playing a new GTA game in 13 years either. Jesus Christ, I need to spell out that it’s a video game and not some life necessity? The usual anti-union scaremongering is about families being delayed for their vacations because airport workers want rights, but this is even more optional.

I don’t buy the premise of workers ruining the lives of consumers; I think the real problem is them ruining the relative profits of shareholders.[1] But F me, I’m not gonna buy this privilege checking over a crime sandbox video game.

[1] This user in another subthread[2] is complaining that people are antagonistic against management. Of course, whatever is most expedient for anti-unionism, everything from woe-is-poor-person to you-need-management-you-peons.

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48326490

[StevenNunez]

Or :gasp: take less profit. The game will take in Billions especially if they release new versions like GTA5 over time.

[charcircuit]

That will negatively affect shareholders which is the opposite of the employees' job. Maximizing the value of the stock to shareholders over time.

[wahnfrieden]

I hope you tip your earnings back to corporate and organize your peers to suppress your wages

[charcircuit]

I do a personal stock buy back which applies upward pressure to the stock price. I don't organize to suppress wages due to wanting to avoid the secondary effects of driving away good talent.

[wahnfrieden]

Doesn't sound like the talent is very good if they are not so mission-driven to donate their wages to shareholders.

You want to surround yourself with peers who negotiate for as high pay as the market will bear? That sounds like a sacrifice of shareholder value for selfish cause. Just because workers have leverage doesn't mean they should use it against shareholders.

[keybored]

Certainly. ;)