You wont get anywhere man. Base human instinct is to place everything in generalized classes because it appeals to our tribal social behaviour. The avarage human being literally cannot go beyond their basic programming and will fight tooth and nail to make sure that just because it looks like another thing those two are in fact related.
then they arent indie
published =! distributed
if you drop your game or steam or M$ store you can still be indie, but if you sign a publishing deal with Epic so they pay you for exclusivity then you sure as frick arent indie
fact is most games people think that are indie, are not, and are usually funded by gigantic companies
I don't mind what definition they use for indie games. Yeah strictly speaking BG3 is indie cause Larian self-published, while Dave Diver isn't because they're part of Nexon, that's undeniably true. But in scope and design, you could argue the opposite is true at least in spirit. You can't put BG3 in the indie category cause that'd be fricked, but Dave Diver at least looks like it was made on an indie budget. Either way is fine by me. But for frick's sake, at least hammer out a definition so people know what you're about and you can keep it consistent. Don't just throw the term "indie" about willie nillie and let everybody wonder what the frick you mean, ESPECIALLY for an awards show.
>is true at least in spirit
not really
the whole point of being independently published is you control your own creative process. You are a single entity developing games and deciding how they are released and advertise.
Dave the Diver is more subject to the whims of their publisher than Larian because with Larian, they work in the same building whereas Dave the Diver's devs are located wherever and away from Nexon's Japan HQ
Even though the definition of indie means independent, it's not what people mean when they say 'indie game'.
The term 'indie game' has taken on a different meaning, such that it has a modest budget/team-size/scope.
And you're autistic if you think otherwise.
They are a minority shareholder, they have nothing to say in the decissions of larian.
Stop trying to push that larian studios is some CCP shill company like those other homosexuals here.
Or maybe the distinction is meaningless and frivolous. Like how really indie is a game with a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars and using one of the most well-known RPG IPs in history?
"Indie" is a plenty useful label, just not in the way morons want it to be.
They want "indie" to mean literally any game with a dev team of under 20 dueds.
If it's outside the "traditional" publisher structure, it can pretty safely be called indie. The real grey area comes from the "indie publishers" like Annapurna
How is a subsidiary of Tencent (which is a subsidiary of the government of China) independent?
You morons needs to open up a book on business management. Larian is not owned by Tencent at all.
https://i.imgur.com/CAqiafp.png
>a fricking indie game will be GOAT.
Also OP is moronic, Larian isn't an indie company under any real definition of what an indie company is specifically due to their size, their business associations, and their corporate status.
>Larian is not owned by Tencent at all.
Except that Tencent owns 30% of the outstanding shares. The only bigger owner is Swen Vincke. Are you arguing shares don’t equal ownership? Because they do. Maybe you should be the one to crack a business textbook.
>a minority stake is a share of a company that is owned by a shareholder who does not have control over the company >a company’s shares that belong to a shareholder other than the controlling shareholder >a minority, or non-controlling interest is ownership or equity interest that consists of less than 50% of an enterprise.
Sister?
7 months ago
Anonymous
>is ownership
7 months ago
Anonymous
>non-controlling
Nice job, buddy. It's also referencing the shares, not the company, ESL.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>30% literally doesn't mean ownership, no >is ownership that consists of less than 50% of an enterprise.
your argument and your own definition
7 months ago
Anonymous
Learn how to read, moron bro. >non-controlling interest >ownership (of shares) >shares that belong (ownership) to someone who does not control a company
7 months ago
Anonymous
Umm this pajeet twitter post said tencent owns 30% of the company so I'll believe that instead of doing my own research on the matter.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>control
irrelevant >ownership (of shares)
and what are shares? you can check the same site you copied that definition from.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>irrelevant
Lol, just because you want it to be the case doesn't mean it is. >you can check the same site you copied that definition from.
Ok. >A share of stock represents an ownership interest in a company. >What, then, do shareholders own? The labels “shareholder” and “stockholder” give the answer. Shareholders own shares of stock. A share of stock, in turn, is simply a contract between the shareholder and the corporation, a contract that gives the shareholder very limited rights under limited circumstances. (Owning shares in Apple doesn’t entitle you to help yourself to the wares in the Apple store.) In this sense stockholders are no different from bondholders, suppliers, and employees. All have contractual relationships with the corporate entity. None “owns” the company itself.
Taken straight from a business processor at an Ivy league school.
7 months ago
Anonymous
professor*
7 months ago
Anonymous
It takes 2 seconds to look up the difference between preferred stock and common stock.
If you think your business 101 class based on simplified principles gives you a clear understanding of modern equity variance you're a fricking idiot.
7 months ago
Anonymous
And what does that have to do with anything that I said? It changes nothing. Also I'm fully aware of that preferred stock and common stock are. Lets not ignore that those aren't even the only two kinds of stock. Nice job moving the goalpost after getting BTFO, by the way.
>what is controlling interest? having 50% or more of a company's shares
So he's right. No idea why you're trying to call anyone else moronic.
7 months ago
Anonymous
That majority shareholder shit is a movie fiction. Real life doesn’t work that way and most investors buying 10% or more of a company or project make sure they are getting some kind of control over their investment as part of the deal
7 months ago
Anonymous
>muh movies >using the legal definition of the word >no, what is legally defined doesn't matter, as long as i want to say a minority shareholder owns the company, they will do what i think they will >i'm just going to ignore that there's multiple kinds of shares with their own benefits and drawbacks >i'm also going to ignore how there's multiple kinds of companies, like public companies, that don't all make 'deals' with their shareholders since these shareholders just buy these things on the market, unlike private companies which control who can and cannot buy them and control what can happen to them even after sale
Take your meds.
Why do you keep posting this when everyone and their mother knows it means nothing, and even if it did, not a single person, not one (1), would give a shit?
>Are you arguing shares don’t equal ownership? Because they do.
The categorically do not. Even the US government had to come out and tell idiots like you that they don't but apparently you didn't get the message. You seem like an idiot that doesn't understand that business terminology is full of misnomers, and you take everything at face value.
Also 30% is not 100%. You might need to go learn how to count.
Yes they do, which is why significant shareholders are owed a fiduciary duty and voting rights. I’d recommend you stay in school you little homosexual and maybe refrain from vague posting until you finish freshman finance.
Ackshually Tencent only has preferred shares so they have no voting rights (and even if they did it would be irrelevant since Swen owns more of the company than the other two shareholders combined)
No, they do not. The supreme court even said that they don't. Everyone in business management knows that they don't. >which is why significant shareholders are owed a fiduciary duty and voting rights
You don't even know what a fiduciary duty is, you fricking moron. Go ahead, tell me what you think it is. I'm going to laugh at this.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>vague posting because he's so mad he can no longer string together a coherent sentence
You know that you don't need to own 100% of the outstanding shares to be an owner, right? Or have you not gotten to that course yet in your D-tier university?
7 months ago
Anonymous
You didn't do what I told you to do. I'm waiting.
7 months ago
Anonymous
The shares are preferential shares, meaning they do not denote ownership or influence. Everyone already caught onto this five minutes after that tweet was first posted months ago, but apparently you're new to the party.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>I own 30% of the shares of a company >also I don't own anything or influence anything
Stay in school.
7 months ago
Anonymous
If that's what the contract says, yeah
7 months ago
Anonymous
The contract doesn't say that.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Yes they do, which is why significant shareholders are owed a fiduciary duty and voting rights. I’d recommend you stay in school you little homosexual and maybe refrain from vague posting until you finish freshman finance.
I'm still waiting, Black person.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>so mad he can't even respond
Oh ho ho ho. Too bad little chuddy. You should probably be studying, that finance 101 exam won't take care of itself.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I knew it, lmao. You're too much of a b***h to say anything so you ran away like you always do when people start outing you for the moron that you are.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>still seething this hard
Lol...lmao. No one ran away little boy.
They are a minority shareholder, they have nothing to say in the decissions of larian.
Stop trying to push that larian studios is some CCP shill company like those other homosexuals here.
>can't even spell decisions
Sorry little turdy but no one cares about your irrelevant opinion.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>no one ran away
Then answer the question that you refuse to answer. If you don't, then you ran away like a cuck.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I dont give a frick what you think you monolingual moron.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>literally admitting to be a sub-80 IQ ESL
lmao
7 months ago
Anonymous
Only americans atack anons on their spelling who obviously arent native english speakers to deflect on the fact that the american poster is moronic as frick.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>ESL cope
No one cares turdy. If you can't even figure out spell-check, what are you doing on the internet? Go back to the pasture.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I bet your some special mut mix too who likes to larp on /misc/ as white.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>your >mut
You were doing okay before, but now it's just sad.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Again, i dont give a frick.
Why is it always americans on Ganker who make it all about english spelling mistakes when all their other shit opinions are torn to pieces.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Convincing stuff there turdy. Maybe you could find an Indian facebook group that is more your speed.
7 months ago
Anonymous
i actually live very close to larian studios, i played divine divinity, their first RPG when it released.
It's you who lives in the third world.
share Tencent holds are preferred share has no or limited voting rights in corporate governance.
>Preferred stock is a different type of equity that represents ownership of a company and the right to claim income from the company's operations. >Preferred stockholders have a higher claim on distributions (e.g. dividends) than common stockholders. >Preferred stockholders usually have no or limited voting rights in corporate governance.
1 >In the event of a liquidation, preferred stockholders' claim on assets is greater than common stockholders but less than bondholders.
2 >Preferred stock has characteristics of both bonds and common stock which enhances its appeal to certain investors.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Even if that is true it is irrelevant as that post was about what it means to own shares in a company in general.
Uhh that doesn't matter, though? You said shareholders own companies, so following this logic Tencent is owned by the Dutch, since Naspers is owned by Prosus, a Dutch company.
These stakes, known as "golden shares", sometimes involve a board seat or other rights, allow the government to gain access to online data and monitor these companies' business activities.
Who told you CCP honor private ownership and everything in China belongs to CCP.
>private ownership
It's publicly traded, dumbass. You don't know what you're talking about. Nice job outing yourself as a moron who just proved shareholders own nothing. There's nothing to "honor" since the business is not the property of who you think it is.
>Chinese government owns a 1% stake in Shenzhen Yayue Technology (not Tencent)
1. That's not Tencent, but a subsidiary.
2. So you're saying amount of shares has nothing to do with control of a company?
Distribution =! Publishing
Its two separate things moron
Publishers handle things like customer support, bug testing, certification with Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo for consoles, marketing, post release support, etc.
Distribution handles actually tangibly getting the product to the customer.
>trading company bought some shares years ago in a growing company >somehow this is a an uber secret smoking gun that ... >... >holding companies do indeed hold shares
wow crazy. really showed them bg3chuds didn't you?
I got no skin in this game but you have to be disingenuous to claim the biggest video game company on the planet isnt responsible for a video game they invested in.
They gave Larian money years ago in order to make more money in future. That's literally all we know. Any further details are conjecture, such as your insane schizophrenic theories about "control" and "influence". You, and all the other dumb morons who keep incessantly posting about Tencent's shares in Larian, have precisely zero additional information on the subject.
I'm finra registered moron
Preffered stockholders dont control anything, and tencent likely cant sell their shares to anyone except swen. They control nothing
7 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm going to still pretend like I know something!
Nope, this is sad.
Well if people are claiming that Dave the Diver isn't indie, neither is BG3. As Larian receives funds from the Chinese Invest Mogul: Tencent. I know your npc brain has trouble processing this information but I am here for you.
How are either of these games indie games? One is an AAA game with a gigantic budget owned partly by tencent and the other is made by a studio owned by nexon.
Indie isn't short for Independent, that would be Inde.
In music, Indie referred to a group of musicians who were generally independent without a major publishing. They all had a similar aesthetic and sound which is what Indie came to mean. If a band from a major label copied that sound they might still be called indie despite not being independent.
Indie is simply a marketing term that can mean practically anything, you're wasting your time trying to narrow it down to specifics, especially when it comes to an awards ceremony where they can pull any shit out their asses.
An indie game, short for independent video game, is a video game typically created by individuals or smaller development teams without the financial and technical support of a large game publisher,
Why hasn't valve ever won any of these indie game awards? Not even publicly traded, why didn't CS2 get nominated for an indie game award? Really weird how HL Alyx never got nominated for any indie award either, people loved that game but not enough for an award? Valve is a well-loved indie developer, why is it that they never win these indie game awards for their fantastic indie games?
But I thought indie just meant independent. Everyone keep saying that it doesn't matter how big the team or the budget is, it's indie because it's independent. So where are valve's indie game awards?
A big publisher usually can access a lot of marketing resource. So the question is that whether the marketing of bg3 was solely relied on larian youtube streaming and some "organic" memes. So Tencent may help them a little bit for their own interest, while bg3 is disqualified as an indie game.
It's still wrong. Somehow the stomp clap stadium folk music that Mumford and sons popularized in San Francisco became the face of indie music and anyone adjacent was also wrongly labelled indie as well.
It's public misconception and just because a lot of people are moronic doesn't mean the definition is going to change.
Indie is a lot older than Mumford. And no it's not a public misconception, it is a marketing device. It has specifically be used and misused by labels and journalists. Just because you are moronic doesn't mean definitions don't change.
"Indie" is such a stupid description anyway. Valve would be considered an indie dev. Why not "small scale GOTY" where the dev team is capped at like 20 or something?
Yes, BG3 is an indie game because it's self published and developed by Larian
And no, Tencent owning part of the company doesn't mean it's not independent, because it is
Being an independent company means it's not a subsidiary
And while it might go against the spirit of indie games, they should have changed the award to low budget game, not indie, words have meaning
Yes Valve games are indie as well
Just call them low budget games and the issue disappears
Oh no, I fully understand how you're trying to use it, but its just as fricking stupid as the use of "indie" in music, where it use to mean a "independent release" but now is a sub gnere of pop punk
Indie = independent = independently released
By definition yes.
You know that for a while not too long ago, Dell bought out their shares and became a private company? They were for a short while before going public again the largest INDEPENDENT computer manufacturer globally.
Operating "Independent" has ZERO barring on the size of the organization anon. It can be one person, or it can be a conglomerate.
The specific phasing "small indie" use to mean something before morons like you thought everything "indie" meant that.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Language evolves over time to fit the need.
If the majority of people associate 'indie' with 'small indie', then that's now what the word means.
7 months ago
Anonymous
I can't believe you can say that with a straight face.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>If the majority of people associate 'indie' with 'small indie', then that's now what the word means. >This thread exsists
While you're completely right about the nature of language, its hardly a closed case on this
7 months ago
Anonymous
>its hardly a closed case on this
Sure, but I wouldn't exactly use Ganker as the place to base a case off.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Lot more to the English speaking world then just the hobby of gaming as well.
7 months ago
Anonymous
>Operating "Independent" has ZERO barring on the size of the organization anon.
No, that's just what you told yourself. Indie was always tied to size. It's why EA/Nintendo/Epic/Sony/Xbox/Rockstar products aren't considered indie games by anyone with more than two brain cells.
>By definition yes.
No, not at all >The term indie is short for independent, which essentially refers to something that operates outside the mainstream or dominant industry. In the context of music, film, and other creative arts, being indie typically implies an approach that deviates from the conventional commercialized norms. >The term indie is an abbreviation for independent, and is commonly used to refer to music artists or record labels that operate outside of the mainstream media networks. Indie artists and labels produce albums on a lower budget and are not tied to major companies. >a small company, especially a music, film, or television company, or a small shop or other business that is not owned by a larger company >An indie game, short for independent video game, is a video game typically created by individuals or smaller development teams without the financial and technical support of a large game publisher, in contrast to most "AAA" (triple-A) games.
You just made up your own internalized definition of what an indie is then tried to act like it was the universal truth.
>Operating "Independent" has ZERO barring on the size of the organization anon.
No, that's just what you told yourself. Indie was always tied to size. It's why EA/Nintendo/Epic/Sony/Xbox/Rockstar products aren't considered indie games by anyone with more than two brain cells.
7 months ago
Anonymous
So every third party game sold on Steam is by your own definition not an indies game, they do dependent on Steam after all.
7 months ago
Anonymous
See
Distribution =! Publishing
Its two separate things moron
Publishers handle things like customer support, bug testing, certification with Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo for consoles, marketing, post release support, etc.
Distribution handles actually tangibly getting the product to the customer.
Distribution does not denote. Otherwise by YOUR observation on that, unless you're walking up to the guy and buying the software on a means that he handed to you directly, there is no way something can be independent.
Think before you hit submit moron.
7 months ago
Anonymous
Steam being a distributor doesn't stop it from doing the publisher's job as well, either way the you're still not independent, and yes you can sell your game to people directly, back in the day the only way to buy Factorio was through the dev's website, for Starsector this is still the case. So yeah you're full of shit bro.
No I don't think it's right for a large company like larian to steal thunder from other tiny games with two to ten person teams. Same like it was moronic for them to put Sifu in the fighting games category..
Why not? The game is self published and self funded. 100% creative control. That's indie. Of course the markets definition of "indie" is it must have shitty 2D graphics made by a couple of guys.
steam is basically money laundering platform. when valve become a public company, a public accounting firm required by law will look all valve trans. and find out all these dirty secrets.
It can if Gabe chooses to do so, company go public for funding.
But Valve doesn't need funding because they make billions of dollars with their storefront since it's basically a monopoly of the pc gaming marketplace.
New rule: you can only be called 'indie' if the game was made by less than 5 people.
All this hairsplitting is moronic. Indie games are meant to be kind of bad yet niche enough to have appeal. There's a whole ecosystem of these small little weird games.
my definition of indie (must, both) >less that 100 people on team (EVERYONE counts, no matter how small the contribution) >less than 1 million USD budget (only money directly used to develop the game)
is it a good one, Ganker?
Indie is short for independent, something at the end of the day dave the diver developers are not.
It takes two was celebrated as an indie game and it was published by EA.
Neither is Larian. They sold it to bugs.
>bro like no one is indie cause even 1 man dev still needs his mom for support therefore not indie lol
You wont get anywhere man. Base human instinct is to place everything in generalized classes because it appeals to our tribal social behaviour. The avarage human being literally cannot go beyond their basic programming and will fight tooth and nail to make sure that just because it looks like another thing those two are in fact related.
/thread
lol moron
Indie = pixel art moron
Like half the list for Indie is gray area with Dave being 100% not indie.
Journalists are fricking moronic.
>mass replier has nothing to add to the conversation besides announcing his moronic presence
Get new material.
said the mass replier
You can't count, Black person. Go back to school.
how much is a mass
Journalists do what gets them views/attention. They are not moronic, they are vile.
Maliciousness and incompetence seem to go hand-in-hand these days, despite the old saying.
most indie games are not self published
then they arent indie
published =! distributed
if you drop your game or steam or M$ store you can still be indie, but if you sign a publishing deal with Epic so they pay you for exclusivity then you sure as frick arent indie
fact is most games people think that are indie, are not, and are usually funded by gigantic companies
It's like third world countries now, nobody cares about the actual meaning, indie = cheap games.
Did someone say goat?
that's a fawn you fricking moron
why did they cut off her hands and feet?
They should call it "high effort" and "low effort" games instead.
I don't mind what definition they use for indie games. Yeah strictly speaking BG3 is indie cause Larian self-published, while Dave Diver isn't because they're part of Nexon, that's undeniably true. But in scope and design, you could argue the opposite is true at least in spirit. You can't put BG3 in the indie category cause that'd be fricked, but Dave Diver at least looks like it was made on an indie budget. Either way is fine by me. But for frick's sake, at least hammer out a definition so people know what you're about and you can keep it consistent. Don't just throw the term "indie" about willie nillie and let everybody wonder what the frick you mean, ESPECIALLY for an awards show.
You're an actual fricking moron
>is true at least in spirit
not really
the whole point of being independently published is you control your own creative process. You are a single entity developing games and deciding how they are released and advertise.
Dave the Diver is more subject to the whims of their publisher than Larian because with Larian, they work in the same building whereas Dave the Diver's devs are located wherever and away from Nexon's Japan HQ
Nexon is Korean
Even though the definition of indie means independent, it's not what people mean when they say 'indie game'.
The term 'indie game' has taken on a different meaning, such that it has a modest budget/team-size/scope.
And you're autistic if you think otherwise.
How is a subsidiary of Tencent (which is a subsidiary of the government of China) independent?
>subsidiary
Don't use words you clearly don't know the meaning of.
They are a minority shareholder, they have nothing to say in the decissions of larian.
Stop trying to push that larian studios is some CCP shill company like those other homosexuals here.
>they have nothing to say in the decissions of larian
lol
>we have demands!!!!
>okay, lets do a majority vote for those demands
>....
A shareholder doesnt give shit to say as long as the stock is doing good, and even if it's not they still have very little to say.
no argument or proof
>30% owned by Tencent
>W-well it's totally indie
Yes, correct.
Or maybe the distinction is meaningless and frivolous. Like how really indie is a game with a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars and using one of the most well-known RPG IPs in history?
"Indie" is a plenty useful label, just not in the way morons want it to be.
They want "indie" to mean literally any game with a dev team of under 20 dueds.
The description for the category very clearly defines it as being based on the publishing process
If it's outside the "traditional" publisher structure, it can pretty safely be called indie. The real grey area comes from the "indie publishers" like Annapurna
>30% is owned by Tencent
>which is literally controlled by the chinese government
>indie
You morons needs to open up a book on business management. Larian is not owned by Tencent at all.
Also OP is moronic, Larian isn't an indie company under any real definition of what an indie company is specifically due to their size, their business associations, and their corporate status.
>Larian is not owned by Tencent at all.
Except that Tencent owns 30% of the outstanding shares. The only bigger owner is Swen Vincke. Are you arguing shares don’t equal ownership? Because they do. Maybe you should be the one to crack a business textbook.
30% literally doesn't mean ownership, no
Except it literally does. It’s called a minority stake.
Right, a minority as in they have no say in the company's operation. All they are entitled to is dividends.
>a minority stake is a share of a company that is owned by a shareholder who does not have control over the company
>a company’s shares that belong to a shareholder other than the controlling shareholder
>a minority, or non-controlling interest is ownership or equity interest that consists of less than 50% of an enterprise.
Sister?
>is ownership
>non-controlling
Nice job, buddy. It's also referencing the shares, not the company, ESL.
>30% literally doesn't mean ownership, no
>is ownership that consists of less than 50% of an enterprise.
your argument and your own definition
Learn how to read, moron bro.
>non-controlling interest
>ownership (of shares)
>shares that belong (ownership) to someone who does not control a company
Umm this pajeet twitter post said tencent owns 30% of the company so I'll believe that instead of doing my own research on the matter.
>control
irrelevant
>ownership (of shares)
and what are shares? you can check the same site you copied that definition from.
>irrelevant
Lol, just because you want it to be the case doesn't mean it is.
>you can check the same site you copied that definition from.
Ok.
>A share of stock represents an ownership interest in a company.
>What, then, do shareholders own? The labels “shareholder” and “stockholder” give the answer. Shareholders own shares of stock. A share of stock, in turn, is simply a contract between the shareholder and the corporation, a contract that gives the shareholder very limited rights under limited circumstances. (Owning shares in Apple doesn’t entitle you to help yourself to the wares in the Apple store.) In this sense stockholders are no different from bondholders, suppliers, and employees. All have contractual relationships with the corporate entity. None “owns” the company itself.
Taken straight from a business processor at an Ivy league school.
professor*
It takes 2 seconds to look up the difference between preferred stock and common stock.
If you think your business 101 class based on simplified principles gives you a clear understanding of modern equity variance you're a fricking idiot.
And what does that have to do with anything that I said? It changes nothing. Also I'm fully aware of that preferred stock and common stock are. Lets not ignore that those aren't even the only two kinds of stock. Nice job moving the goalpost after getting BTFO, by the way.
>30% literally doesn't mean ownership, no
Is this bait or is Ganker genuinely this moronic?
>what is controlling interest? having 50% or more of a company's shares
So he's right. No idea why you're trying to call anyone else moronic.
That majority shareholder shit is a movie fiction. Real life doesn’t work that way and most investors buying 10% or more of a company or project make sure they are getting some kind of control over their investment as part of the deal
>muh movies
>using the legal definition of the word
>no, what is legally defined doesn't matter, as long as i want to say a minority shareholder owns the company, they will do what i think they will
>i'm just going to ignore that there's multiple kinds of shares with their own benefits and drawbacks
>i'm also going to ignore how there's multiple kinds of companies, like public companies, that don't all make 'deals' with their shareholders since these shareholders just buy these things on the market, unlike private companies which control who can and cannot buy them and control what can happen to them even after sale
Take your meds.
Why do you keep posting this when everyone and their mother knows it means nothing, and even if it did, not a single person, not one (1), would give a shit?
>Are you arguing shares don’t equal ownership? Because they do.
The categorically do not. Even the US government had to come out and tell idiots like you that they don't but apparently you didn't get the message. You seem like an idiot that doesn't understand that business terminology is full of misnomers, and you take everything at face value.
Also 30% is not 100%. You might need to go learn how to count.
Yes they do, which is why significant shareholders are owed a fiduciary duty and voting rights. I’d recommend you stay in school you little homosexual and maybe refrain from vague posting until you finish freshman finance.
Ackshually Tencent only has preferred shares so they have no voting rights (and even if they did it would be irrelevant since Swen owns more of the company than the other two shareholders combined)
No, they do not. The supreme court even said that they don't. Everyone in business management knows that they don't.
>which is why significant shareholders are owed a fiduciary duty and voting rights
You don't even know what a fiduciary duty is, you fricking moron. Go ahead, tell me what you think it is. I'm going to laugh at this.
>vague posting because he's so mad he can no longer string together a coherent sentence
You know that you don't need to own 100% of the outstanding shares to be an owner, right? Or have you not gotten to that course yet in your D-tier university?
You didn't do what I told you to do. I'm waiting.
The shares are preferential shares, meaning they do not denote ownership or influence. Everyone already caught onto this five minutes after that tweet was first posted months ago, but apparently you're new to the party.
>I own 30% of the shares of a company
>also I don't own anything or influence anything
Stay in school.
If that's what the contract says, yeah
The contract doesn't say that.
I'm still waiting, Black person.
>so mad he can't even respond
Oh ho ho ho. Too bad little chuddy. You should probably be studying, that finance 101 exam won't take care of itself.
I knew it, lmao. You're too much of a b***h to say anything so you ran away like you always do when people start outing you for the moron that you are.
>still seething this hard
Lol...lmao. No one ran away little boy.
>can't even spell decisions
Sorry little turdy but no one cares about your irrelevant opinion.
>no one ran away
Then answer the question that you refuse to answer. If you don't, then you ran away like a cuck.
I dont give a frick what you think you monolingual moron.
>literally admitting to be a sub-80 IQ ESL
lmao
Only americans atack anons on their spelling who obviously arent native english speakers to deflect on the fact that the american poster is moronic as frick.
>ESL cope
No one cares turdy. If you can't even figure out spell-check, what are you doing on the internet? Go back to the pasture.
I bet your some special mut mix too who likes to larp on /misc/ as white.
>your
>mut
You were doing okay before, but now it's just sad.
Again, i dont give a frick.
Why is it always americans on Ganker who make it all about english spelling mistakes when all their other shit opinions are torn to pieces.
Convincing stuff there turdy. Maybe you could find an Indian facebook group that is more your speed.
i actually live very close to larian studios, i played divine divinity, their first RPG when it released.
It's you who lives in the third world.
share Tencent holds are preferred share has no or limited voting rights in corporate governance.
>Preferred stock is a different type of equity that represents ownership of a company and the right to claim income from the company's operations.
>Preferred stockholders have a higher claim on distributions (e.g. dividends) than common stockholders.
>Preferred stockholders usually have no or limited voting rights in corporate governance.
1
>In the event of a liquidation, preferred stockholders' claim on assets is greater than common stockholders but less than bondholders.
2
>Preferred stock has characteristics of both bonds and common stock which enhances its appeal to certain investors.
Even if that is true it is irrelevant as that post was about what it means to own shares in a company in general.
You're just never going to accept that everyone has repeatedly called you out on your stupid moronation which you based on a single random tweet?
how are you still going? do you have a humiliation fetish?
Tencent is actually controlled by the South African government, get your facts right.
Beijing takes 'golden share' in a Tencent subsidiary, records show
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/beijing-takes-golden-share-tencent-subsidiary-records-show-2023-10-19/
Uhh that doesn't matter, though? You said shareholders own companies, so following this logic Tencent is owned by the Dutch, since Naspers is owned by Prosus, a Dutch company.
>https://www.reuters.com/world/china/beijing-takes-golden-share-tencent-subsidiary-records-show-2023-10-19/
These stakes, known as "golden shares", sometimes involve a board seat or other rights, allow the government to gain access to online data and monitor these companies' business activities.
Who told you CCP honor private ownership and everything in China belongs to CCP.
>private ownership
It's publicly traded, dumbass. You don't know what you're talking about. Nice job outing yourself as a moron who just proved shareholders own nothing. There's nothing to "honor" since the business is not the property of who you think it is.
>Chinese government owns a 1% stake in Shenzhen Yayue Technology (not Tencent)
1. That's not Tencent, but a subsidiary.
2. So you're saying amount of shares has nothing to do with control of a company?
Nobody is indie because Valve is publishing your game.
Is Gamestop a publisher?
yes
Distribution =! Publishing
Its two separate things moron
Publishers handle things like customer support, bug testing, certification with Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo for consoles, marketing, post release support, etc.
Distribution handles actually tangibly getting the product to the customer.
Neither Dave the Diver or Baldur's Gate 3 are indie games. And DTD wasn't made by a subsidiary of Nexon.
Larian might self publish but they take tencent money which disqualifies them too
Is valve indie?
Yes.
They're not a publicly traded company and they do their own distribution.
They're the largest indie company in gaming by a LARGE margin.
>BG3
>Indie
Nope funded by tencent.
>trading company bought some shares years ago in a growing company
>somehow this is a an uber secret smoking gun that ...
>...
>holding companies do indeed hold shares
wow crazy. really showed them bg3chuds didn't you?
I got no skin in this game but you have to be disingenuous to claim the biggest video game company on the planet isnt responsible for a video game they invested in.
They gave Larian money years ago in order to make more money in future. That's literally all we know. Any further details are conjecture, such as your insane schizophrenic theories about "control" and "influence". You, and all the other dumb morons who keep incessantly posting about Tencent's shares in Larian, have precisely zero additional information on the subject.
>I dont know anything but I want to sound like I do!
I'm finra registered moron
Preffered stockholders dont control anything, and tencent likely cant sell their shares to anyone except swen. They control nothing
>I'm going to still pretend like I know something!
Nope, this is sad.
If you don't own common stock you don't control shit
Well if people are claiming that Dave the Diver isn't indie, neither is BG3. As Larian receives funds from the Chinese Invest Mogul: Tencent. I know your npc brain has trouble processing this information but I am here for you.
Fortnite is my favorite indie game!
it's a matter of narratives anon
remember when the narrative was "Swen is running an illegal black site dev studio in Russia"
How are either of these games indie games? One is an AAA game with a gigantic budget owned partly by tencent and the other is made by a studio owned by nexon.
Larian isn't owned by tencent. And they're just at AAA quality, but they are self published and answer to no one. Therefore larian is an indie studio.
Having an investor such as tencent with a minority ownership in STOCK is not the same as having owner ship of the company.
Yeah and valve is also an indie studio by that definition, but nobody ever calls counterstrike an indie game.
>Game made by a multinational company with over 400 employees
>Indie
Don't forget the multiple third world outsourcing studios that worked on the game.
Jesus fricking christ, when is An Hiro going to ban Americans and Europeans. 99% of them are objectively subhuman.
Seething thirdie, your country is a shithole because you are shit.
ITT no true scotsman
Indie isn't short for Independent, that would be Inde.
In music, Indie referred to a group of musicians who were generally independent without a major publishing. They all had a similar aesthetic and sound which is what Indie came to mean. If a band from a major label copied that sound they might still be called indie despite not being independent.
Indie is simply a marketing term that can mean practically anything, you're wasting your time trying to narrow it down to specifics, especially when it comes to an awards ceremony where they can pull any shit out their asses.
An indie game, short for independent video game, is a video game typically created by individuals or smaller development teams without the financial and technical support of a large game publisher,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indie_game
Why hasn't valve ever won any of these indie game awards? Not even publicly traded, why didn't CS2 get nominated for an indie game award? Really weird how HL Alyx never got nominated for any indie award either, people loved that game but not enough for an award? Valve is a well-loved indie developer, why is it that they never win these indie game awards for their fantastic indie games?
>Why hasn't valve ever won any of these indie game awards?
Valve is a big game publisher. What do you mean?
But I thought indie just meant independent. Everyone keep saying that it doesn't matter how big the team or the budget is, it's indie because it's independent. So where are valve's indie game awards?
by your logic Nintendo and sony are indie too
Well jeez, if it's not true then why is everyone saying? Even geoff keighly says so.
>But I thought indie just meant independent.
You thought wrong. They need to be small, publisher free, developers. No mega corp is going to be indie.
How did bg3 get nominated for an indie game award if it's a big AAA game?
>How did bg3 get nominated for an indie game award
It didn't.
A big publisher usually can access a lot of marketing resource. So the question is that whether the marketing of bg3 was solely relied on larian youtube streaming and some "organic" memes. So Tencent may help them a little bit for their own interest, while bg3 is disqualified as an indie game.
It's still wrong. Somehow the stomp clap stadium folk music that Mumford and sons popularized in San Francisco became the face of indie music and anyone adjacent was also wrongly labelled indie as well.
It's public misconception and just because a lot of people are moronic doesn't mean the definition is going to change.
Indie is a lot older than Mumford. And no it's not a public misconception, it is a marketing device. It has specifically be used and misused by labels and journalists. Just because you are moronic doesn't mean definitions don't change.
>just because a lot of people are moronic doesn't mean the definition is going to change
but that's exactly how it works
"Indie" is such a stupid description anyway. Valve would be considered an indie dev. Why not "small scale GOTY" where the dev team is capped at like 20 or something?
Yes, BG3 is an indie game because it's self published and developed by Larian
And no, Tencent owning part of the company doesn't mean it's not independent, because it is
Being an independent company means it's not a subsidiary
And while it might go against the spirit of indie games, they should have changed the award to low budget game, not indie, words have meaning
Yes Valve games are indie as well
Just call them low budget games and the issue disappears
>sell 99% of my shares to Tencent
>still independent
lol...lmao.
Can't believe pizza tower didn't even get a spot in best indie while this slop did.
The frick is the "traditional publisher structure"? And how big does a publishet have to be to be a "major publisher"?
If you sell 30% of your shares to Tencent then you’re not independent.
>indie game
Please define indie game
a game made in india
Hiding your publishing partner via a shell company doesn't make you indie, it makes you sketchy.
BG3 wasn't indie either. They had wizards funding. By that logic Star Citizen would be indie too.
What's your favorite indie game? I like fortnite, it's a pretty good indie game.
Epic is a privately held company who handles their own distribution.
While you're being a moron with the snark, they are independent by definition.
The only moron here is the guy who thinks Epic is an indie dev. You clearly don't understand the definition of indie.
Oh no, I fully understand how you're trying to use it, but its just as fricking stupid as the use of "indie" in music, where it use to mean a "independent release" but now is a sub gnere of pop punk
Indie = independent = independently released
Can a licensed game based on a massive IP such as D&D be indie?
Because they self published, and they're a private company
THATS ALL
why did fortnite never get nominated for any indie game awards?
Because award shows are 100% marketing ploys?
Are you fricking stupid?
So Fornite and Counter-Strike 2 are indie games?
To be honest, i think you're just a disingenuous moron.
By definition yes.
You know that for a while not too long ago, Dell bought out their shares and became a private company? They were for a short while before going public again the largest INDEPENDENT computer manufacturer globally.
I can't believe you can say that with a straight face.
By your argument there are also more than two genders.
Operating "Independent" has ZERO barring on the size of the organization anon. It can be one person, or it can be a conglomerate.
The specific phasing "small indie" use to mean something before morons like you thought everything "indie" meant that.
Language evolves over time to fit the need.
If the majority of people associate 'indie' with 'small indie', then that's now what the word means.
I can't believe you can say that with a straight face.
>If the majority of people associate 'indie' with 'small indie', then that's now what the word means.
>This thread exsists
While you're completely right about the nature of language, its hardly a closed case on this
>its hardly a closed case on this
Sure, but I wouldn't exactly use Ganker as the place to base a case off.
Lot more to the English speaking world then just the hobby of gaming as well.
>Operating "Independent" has ZERO barring on the size of the organization anon.
No, that's just what you told yourself. Indie was always tied to size. It's why EA/Nintendo/Epic/Sony/Xbox/Rockstar products aren't considered indie games by anyone with more than two brain cells.
>By definition yes.
No, not at all
>The term indie is short for independent, which essentially refers to something that operates outside the mainstream or dominant industry. In the context of music, film, and other creative arts, being indie typically implies an approach that deviates from the conventional commercialized norms.
>The term indie is an abbreviation for independent, and is commonly used to refer to music artists or record labels that operate outside of the mainstream media networks. Indie artists and labels produce albums on a lower budget and are not tied to major companies.
>a small company, especially a music, film, or television company, or a small shop or other business that is not owned by a larger company
>An indie game, short for independent video game, is a video game typically created by individuals or smaller development teams without the financial and technical support of a large game publisher, in contrast to most "AAA" (triple-A) games.
You just made up your own internalized definition of what an indie is then tried to act like it was the universal truth.
So every third party game sold on Steam is by your own definition not an indies game, they do dependent on Steam after all.
See
Distribution does not denote. Otherwise by YOUR observation on that, unless you're walking up to the guy and buying the software on a means that he handed to you directly, there is no way something can be independent.
Think before you hit submit moron.
Steam being a distributor doesn't stop it from doing the publisher's job as well, either way the you're still not independent, and yes you can sell your game to people directly, back in the day the only way to buy Factorio was through the dev's website, for Starsector this is still the case. So yeah you're full of shit bro.
Guess nothing on Steam is Indie then
Oh look. I can do the same thing.
Shut up, Black person.
No I don't think it's right for a large company like larian to steal thunder from other tiny games with two to ten person teams. Same like it was moronic for them to put Sifu in the fighting games category..
Why not? The game is self published and self funded. 100% creative control. That's indie. Of course the markets definition of "indie" is it must have shitty 2D graphics made by a couple of guys.
>100% creative control
I doubt that, I'm sure Wizards of the Coast had many stipulations about what Larian could do with the license.
Reminder Valve is a small indie studio
It's amazing how valve is still a private company after all this time.
>valve
There is no way valve can become a public company.
>Valve shuts down money laundering via CS:GO game
>https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50262447
If gaben/successor sells, or Valve goes public, you just know that Microsoft or some other company is just going to swoop in and buy the whole lot up.
steam is basically money laundering platform. when valve become a public company, a public accounting firm required by law will look all valve trans. and find out all these dirty secrets.
>broken english
Why do brown people hate valve so much?
A international payment system of valve can be operated inside China GFW, when even apple has to handle over Chinese data to CCP.
It can if Gabe chooses to do so, company go public for funding.
But Valve doesn't need funding because they make billions of dollars with their storefront since it's basically a monopoly of the pc gaming marketplace.
Larian is AA, not indie.
Do you consider CDPR AA or AAA?
>if you don't own 100% of the shares of the company, you don't own it!
Okay so Sven doesn't own Larian either. Nice argument, really compelling stuff.
So what do you call these "not indie but not AA or AAA" games? Single A? That's fricking stupid.
"Games"
Low budget?
>indie
>backed by Tencent/Wotc, 400 people worked at the game for 6 years, so 100 million budget without marketing campaign
hahaha, have a nice day OP
>400 people
No, it was 2000.
https://www.mobygames.com/game/150689/baldurs-gate-iii/credits/windows/
>Tencent
Tencent was not involved in the funding or making of BG3
>WoTC
They paid Wizards for the license and didn't recieve funding from them.
>When you put so much love and effort into your game people scream it's unfair and shouldn't be considered an indie game
New rule: you can only be called 'indie' if the game was made by less than 5 people.
All this hairsplitting is moronic. Indie games are meant to be kind of bad yet niche enough to have appeal. There's a whole ecosystem of these small little weird games.
what did you expect from a bunch of autistic man-children?
>Hey guys me and my 6 friends have made a 7 person game studio and we could really use your suppor...
>FRICKIN AAA SLOP
If you have HR, health insurance benfits, shareholders or investors, you’re not indie any more
Pizza Tower is a surprise GOTY. Not on the list, but still manages to win every award.
my definition of indie (must, both)
>less that 100 people on team (EVERYONE counts, no matter how small the contribution)
>less than 1 million USD budget (only money directly used to develop the game)
is it a good one, Ganker?
Indie is just basically an aesthetic at this point.
the 30% is of a small subsidiary of Larian in Ireland
they own next to nothing of actual Larian which is a privately owned corporation
there's no way for them to force anything on actual Larian
None of these games are Indie, because they don’t feature Indiana Jones.
Is Tencent in the room with us right now?
everything with more than 5 people is not an indie for me.