473
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
473 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
12795 readers
907 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- 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
He was never the owner. It's a 45 billion dollar company, his net worth is said to be like 250 mill. He was paid a very high salary since he was one of the original employees of that subsidiary, and given some stock in the parent company as bonuses, so he's set for life and richer than most of us will ever be, but he never had any real say in the parent company's decisions. Take-Two is known for being absolute scum. They don't just own Rockstar Games, they also own the companies behind the Civilization series (which has Paradox-like DLC scumming) and the Borderlands series (remember when BL3 was Epic exclusive on PC?).
Technically if you'd started at, say, Microsoft as a software engineer or other similar role when he started at Rockstar, and stayed there until 2020, you could honestly be richer. Same for Google, some of their earliest employees became billionaires from the stock options. The Houser brothers made Rockstar famous, but they were never ownership class.
But even as a creative director, he was this oblivious to visa extortion contracted labourers?
Uh I'm pretty sure as creative director, he didn't see anyone holding a gun to anyone's head forcing them to sign a shit contract.
Why exactly do you think they were being extorted before any of this? If someone worked for a company for several years, I'm assuming they actually liked working there. Before someone at Take-two saw that there were a bunch of people at their subsidiary who'd unionized, some of whom were foreigners on visas and some locals. Why is the problem for you not that a bunch of people were fired for unionizing, but the fact that some of them weren't born on the island they were working on?
This reads as if you're ignorant on how much more visa workers pay to live somewhere than locals. Should 50+% of my income go to my residency status in a country where that income pars rent prices? Ignorance of visa extortion in the UK is your choice. But don't tell me Dan was ignorant to the exploitation.