this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2024
312 points (100.0% liked)

PC Gaming

11185 readers
789 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
312
That lawsuit against Steam’s 30% cut of game sales is now a class action, meaning many other developers could benefit (www.rockpapershotgun.com)
submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
275 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Amongst the top 100 most valuable companies, not a single one is ran as a worker collective. [...] I don't know how much more of a source you need.

I didn't ask for sources that they're not a thing, I asked for sources on the reasons for that.

The current legal system doesn't do anything to prevent worker-ran companies.

I'm a startup owner (in Germany) who has looked at the possibility of making my company worker-owned. It is serious effort and comes with a lot of hurdles, tax headaches, etc., because the legal system is not generally made with that kind of company structure in mind, much less the transition into it. It is very easy to start a company with the default capitalist structure of one or a few owners/investors, it requires magnitudes more to do it the worker-owned way (and do it right). But sure tell me again how the legal system is impartial in that matter.

In the end, too many cooks spoil the broth.

That's assuming that everyone wants to have a say in everything, and that there are no good internal structures for dividing and assigning responsibility. You can still have individual people who steer the ship, who make autonomous decisions in certain areas, etc. The difference being that they're selected by their peers, rather than through a management hierarchy, and they answer to their peers, rather than their managers and/or investors.