eh, what works in comics and what works for movies isn’t necessarily the same thing.

Deadline’s reporting includes the claim that WBD is taking a $30M tax write-off (or write-down, not sure which (or if there’s even a difference)):

I saw that, which is interesting, because there’s been a lot of talk of 23 people being laid off in the “restructuring” so I wonder about the other 9 people.

I’m sorry - where do you live that you can buy a whole ass meal for $6? I don’t live in a huge city at all and a sandwich at any fast food place is $5 or more, and there certainly aren’t any local restaurants where I can get out the door with an entire meal for under $9 or $10 at the bare minimum and I’m not sure I…

Under that same reasoning, you could take those $6, buy groceries and cook yourself the restaurant meal at least 3 times. 

It looks like the legal team (company lawyer) retaliated after she complained. De Niro’s behavior was not found excessive, but the claimed retaliation was.

Not for nothing, but Xbox and Playstation consoles are sold at a loss... so that they can sell you $70 games with $20 skins. 

It turns out it was the production company talking to her while it urinated.

Lil’ bit!

That’s part of the reason why I’m suspicious. Batgirl and Scoob! were going direct-to-streaming. They were never going to generate direct revenue, so exploiting a tax loophole that had a limited time window and essentially did cover the cost of production makes plenty of sense to me. But it sounds like this movie was…

It confused me too. From what I can tell by reading a couple of the articles about it, his production company was found liable. It looks like the court allowed an agency jury instruction opening the door for the jury to find De Niro’s girlfriend was an agent of the corporation. It seems like there was a lot of…

How did we let $20 skins become a thing? For the same reason we let $499 consoles become a thing. Because people will pay it. No, I wouldn’t; $20 cosmetic items are useless to me. $20 means a decent game, whether on console or on PC for me.

I don’t see where in the THR article it claims that WBD is taking a tax write-down on this film. It mentions the tax write-downs the studio took last year for Batgirl and Scoob!, but as was reported at the time, the specifics of the situation involved the studio taking advantage of a tax loophole as a direct result of…

a skin whipped up in a few weeks tells me you’re likely an indie dev and not AAA. Because “a few weeks” might be right for first art pass, but ignores all of the QA, animation tests, certification. most premium skins are more months than weeks of work accross many people.

Corporate greed is a funny way of shifting…

If someone wants to shell out cash for character skins, so be it. But all I think when I see them is “there’s someone who pays cash for character skins”.

More like hilariously ironic, since G/O Union’s “win” a couple years back is what caused Jez to become unfprofitable.

I don’t understand how it wasn’t sold. Sure, they might have received less than what they wanted, but it seems better to get rid of it by selling rather than by shutting it down. Maybe shutting down gives them a nice big loss for tax purposes?

inflation. its less the skins are expensive and more that games have not risen in prices relative to everything else in the world so this is how companies keep up.

Sonic 1 on the genesis cost 78 dollars in 1991 which is 181 dollars in 2023.

PS1 games cost 40 dollars in 1995, which is 82 dollars in 2023 money

I have no issue with companies pushing multiple different skins for a little bit extra as long as there are no gameplay advantages given.

Pay-2-win is never fun for anyone.

Yep. The whole outfit is being stripped for parts. Selling off what they can before shutting down the rest. Sucks.