https://www.pcgamer.com/ex-valve-employee-describes-ruthless...
I also can't help but not overlook that he's an UFO nut. can't trust info from someone who can warp reality in a way to see only what fits his own preconceived notions even if they fly in the face of basic facts.
That's not true.
There's been lots of criticism coming at Valve's management style over the years: There are many people who _hate_ it, but also many people who love it. It really depends on the type of person you are. If you really really dislike bureaucracy Valve's a great place to be, but also don't expect them to enact any quality-of-life systems: If your coworker wants you dead, then that's something you yourself have to deal with.
This is also why you see a lot of different opinions when looking through e.g. glassdoor: Some people that do the murdering love it there and thrive, but that system only works if people are there that can be murdered. Some people I know have described the atmosphere as "prison yard style": You trade rigid bureaucracy against a "you have to know who you have to know" bureaucracy. Richard Geldreich's account lines up pretty well to what I have heard about valve's emergent self-organization system.
A couple of years ago there was a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41XgkLKYuic that summarized the working environment.
Looking at it as a consumer, Valve didn't get anything released for many years, which imo would point at there in fact being a problem. Not necessarily what this guy is claming, but there did seem to be issues.
They have shipped HL:A and Steam Deck now, so maybe they've solved it or are solving it.
They have first mover advantage on a platform that's true, but even when competitors significantly undercut them they can't take any notable percentage of Steam market share. Epic is literally giving away free content every month and can't compete.
Well, that’s your personal opinion but I’m not sure how his thoughts on UFOs discredits his view of the work culture at Valve. One can have metaphysical and spiritual beliefs and be an extraordinary scientist as well for example.
Many have left Valve but usually people in the relatively constrained game dev industry tend to be conservative in voicing their opinions if only for their future careers prospects.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong... but that's how you bet.
false. wrong, wrong, wrong.
he's the only one you know about, is all. he's not even the only one that has spoken publicly about it.
You have to make a really cool looking hat for Team Fortress 2.
But let's assume for a minute that what you're saying has some merit. Maybe Valve does have grounds to sue. And maybe they're interested in suing. In that case, is this lousy attempt at being coy helpful? It's clear from his bio that he's only worked at one such company. So it's abundantly clear to everyone who he's working for.
In reality, this pattern ("worked for a large software-advertising company with a double O in it's name") is fucking annoying. It's designed to make the reader curious and more likely to read the rest of what's written. It's similar to clickbait in that sense. And I wish to God it would stop. I'd request people to please just name names, or keep it yourself.
This isn't about civil disputes anyways. No employer wants to see a prospective new hire trash talking their previous company. Doesn't matter if it's deserved or not, it's seen as a liability.
[1] You know what, one employer definitely did that, apparently bribed my lawyer to get them to drop the case, got that vibe from the lawyer. Yeah, I thought I could argue with you at the very beginning, but no longer.
[2] Extradition from a country of which you are a citizen requires a real trial, like that takes years, America will let me go to prison without trial but Chile will not let America do that without any kind of extradition trial at all. A lawyer congratulated me on this defensive maneuver.
It isn't fair, but that's how it is. Don't poke the bear anymore than you have to. All you have to do is personally anger one executive and they can go after you.
yes, exactly. Esp. if he is the only one talking about it this way publicly. If it's truly awful, employees will vote with their wallets and quit.
And if valve wins the law suit, what reward would they have gained, other than stopping him from saying what he has already said (which cannot be taken back). There might be punitive damages to be paid, but it's not like the corporation is going to make money from doing so.
And in fact, making a law suit would legitimize the claims!
They most likely won't, you are correct. But it just simply doesn't seem to be worth the trouble on the off-chance that they will decide to do it.
The whole thing is just a situation where you risk a lot (even if the chance of that risk materializing is very small), but you aren't really gaining anything by taking the risk. What's the point of taking the risk of naming the company, if you can tell the entire story just as fine without naming them and reducing the risk to zero?
That’s my point. He’s not reducing shit. We all know exactly who he’s talking about. All he’s done is curiosity baited us into reading this.
I would certainly have a different opinion about someone saying negative things about me in anonymous generic terms that people paying attention could figure out, vs using my name and posting direct criticism. As would most people I think.
(Unless it means 'expert witness' in court, in which case 'and the FBI were involved' is the weird bit.)
"Valve fires Jeri Ellsworth, who was developing Steam Box game controllers"