Witcher 3 - Don't expect a Witcher 4

Ripper said:

One would not frequently describe people of such stature as a spokesperson, even though it would be correct. The phrase, "Obama is the spokesman for the American people" is a perfectly reasonable one that you might well see in certain contexts. I would also venture that comparing the boss of a mid-sized game studio to the leader of the free world is rather absurd. I've also tried to explain why this is irrelevant to my point.



The "facts" you appear to be offering consist of a single Eurogamer article, in which The CEO says a few lines about rebel spirit (none of which preclude a conceivable buyout) and some editorialising by a journalist. If you showed that to an investor or stock broker, and said, "See - we can now be sure that CDPR won't ever be bought out," I'm afraid he would laugh in your face.

I'm not quite sure how else to put it to you. Comments from a CEO on a Given day ≠ guarantee of future events?

Click to expand...

No one ever claimed any absolute "guarantees" that CDPR wouldn't ever be taken over. Instead it was you who characterized the takeover issue "a reasonable concern". Indeed, your current straw man issue of anyone claiming "we can now be sure that CDPR won't ever be bought out," is an admission that you original argument was unsupportable.

No one ever compared "the boss of a mid-sized game studio to the leader of the free world." Similarly no reliable reporter characterizes the President of the US, or the President of a company publicly listed on a major stock exchange, as merely a "spokesperson" for their respective organization despite your failure to acknowledge this. Your position simply isn't reasonably supportable, no matter how you now choose to mischaracterize it.

I'm done arguing. Believe what you will. Distort however you wish. Bill Gates statements on behalf of Microsoft were never accurately characterized as statements made by some unnamed "spokesperson" for Microsoft. Similarly, although a takeover of CDPR isn't beyond the realm of possibility, actual facts that you dismiss or ignore undercut your original position that such a takeover of CDPR represents a "reasonable concern."

__

You keep making all sorts of assertions and accusations about mischaracterisation and distortion, in lieu of any actual development of an argument. I reject them, you repeat them, we get nowhere.

Let's instead have a look at the evidence you're offering, that you think refutes the idea of a CDPR takeover as a reasonable concern. Upon examination, it's clear that this is where the misrepresentation occurs.

There was a rumour of an EA takeover, which CDPR wished to quash. From the article:

CD Projekt Red has issued a formal statement to Eurogamer this morning in response to an unfounded rumour that spread yesterday.
"We usually don't comment on rumours but this one has become quite viral and we think it deserves to be put to bed," said co-founder Marcin Iwinski on behalf of the Board. "We are not talking with anyone regarding selling CD Projekt Red or GOG.com. Period. And the payslip is a fake - it was not issued by our company."

Click to expand...

And that is all he had to say on the subject of the takeover. There is nothing there to rule out any future possibilities. The Eurogamer journalist then adds comments from an interview from months earlier, not discussing the subject of the possible takeover. Look at it in its original context:

"I have been once to visit Blizzard in Irvine and I really liked what they had there…" he adds. "Of course it will be in our style, but a place where people can work and live."

With mention of Blizzard comes a fear of the big time, of becoming a corporation, and of CD Projekt Red no longer being one of the good guys - not to suggest that Blizzard isn't. Look at what happened to BioWare's image under EA. When you're at the top, the only place you can go is down.

"What we have as the slogan of our studio is that 'we are rebels'," Iwiński says. "Rebels, underdogs - I think it's a state of mind. The moment we start becoming conservative [and] stop taking creative risks and business risks, and stop being true to what we're doing, that's when we should worry. And I am not worried. Our values and our care for what we are doing and - hopefully what gamers would agree with - care for gamers is what drives this company forward. Whether we are big or small, we have a multiplatform open-world game or just a PC release, the game and our deeds are what counts, not the fact that we are perceived by some as the big guys.
"It's my personal horror to become a faceless behemoth of game development or publishing or whatnot," he adds. "As long as I am here I will be fighting for this not to happen."

Click to expand...

None of what he says here is clearly about rejecting a takeover. They are talking about whether, when success inevitably grows CDPR into a larger corporation (which could easily include a merger or buyout), this will change them. What he's saying is that no matter how big they grow, they will still retain their attitude and culture. That's great, but it doesn't exclude the possibility of a future buy-out at all.

You have presented all this as, “CDPR's co-founder and Joint CEO has stated vehemently that he is against any takeover of the type of the type you originally speculated.” I think that is a very clear misrepresentation of the situation; he has said no such thing.

The above is the sum total of your “facts” that you claim make concerns about a future buyout unfounded. It seems to me an extremely weak case.