you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 9 hours ago (6 children)

For all those workers who are not part of the creative co-op of full-time workers, a second co-op is being designed

this is very naive and not a cooperative. a coop is one member, one vote. you can still give disproportionate ownership to different stakeholders in a multi-stakeholder coop.

that they call this multiple coops, and that they call the consumer-ownership a "non-profit", I think this is still clearly a grift. I hope they put out a good game, I'll probably play it. but I'm not going to buy in

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

    What exactly are you looking for here? I don't feel like involving players any more than they already are in this setup would be a good idea, knowing the average gamer. Wouldn't imagine this game will sell enough copies for profit sharing to hand out anything significant either.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 hours ago* (2 children)

    Wouldn't imagine this game will sell enough copies for profit sharing to hand out anything significant either.

    If they make a good game despite their weird organizational structure, why not? DE had on the order of magnitude of 100 of millions of dollars in sales. Even fraction of that could translate into a pretty healthy bonus pay at least.

    I see people asking for a spiritual successor of DE all the time, so the game probably doesn't even have to be all that great to be successful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments