NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

December 8, 2008

On Saturday, GamePolitics broke the news that MMO publisher NCsoft was the latest company to leave the ranks of game industry trade association the ESA.

At the time GP speculated that the move might have been financially motivated. NCsoft has, after all, experienced some setbacks in recent months.

However, NCsoft's Director of Public Relations, David Swofford, assures us that the decision to leave the ESA is not related to those issues. NCsoft released this statement concerning its ESA membership:

While we appreciate what the ESA does for our industry, we can confirm that NCsoft has elected not to keep membership with the ESA for 2009.

This decision was not financially motivated, as indicated in your story. There have been many changes in the gaming industry over the past couple of years and, like other developers and publishers, we have decided to wait to see how related industry events and organizations further develop before rejoining. We will be reviewing our membership status on an annual basis.

In a phone interview Swofford elaborated on NCsoft's position and pointed out that, prior to leaving, the company did not have a long history as an ESA member:

We joined [ESA] for one year and then we decided we wouldn't [renew].  We think everything the ESA does is great. Right now the timing is just not right for us to be a member of the ESA.

Swofford also told GP that trade show issues are very important for NCsoft, which exhibited at PAX this year, but not E3:

Everyone is looking to see how E3 plays out now.

So, might NCsoft rejoin the ESA fold at some point in the future?

Absolutely. We're going to assess that on a yearly basis.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

We joined [ESA] for one year and then we decided we wouldn't [renew].  We think everything the ESA does is great. Right now the timing is just not right for us to be a member of the ESA.

I think they are just being nice about it.  Either that or they are lying about being able to afford it.

--- Official Protector of Videoland!

Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

What is their DRM method?

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls


Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

Making you pay $15 a month.

Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

Pretty much. Everything in the NCSoft library is a MMO game that generates revenue either from:

a) Monthly fees (City of Heroes, Lineage 2)

b) Paid bonuses (Guild Wars, Exsteel)

Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

Well, this year's E3 is supposed to be bigger and better than last year's, but that's not saying much.

"There is no sin except stupidity." - Oscar Wilde

Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

Good ideas for writing a paper on Finance.

Re: NCsoft: ESA Departure Not Based on Finances

Yes I think its a good idea. I am student of school of computer Science and planning to take courses from  school of health sciences and school of natural sciences. I am looking for a job for my studies expenses

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 02/09/10 at 03:02pm
Valdearg: @DS: Im sure that's what they'd do if it wasn't legal to just tell Gays/TG's to "Screw off," just because they're who they are.
Posted 02/09/10 at 02:50pm
DarkSaber: Whoever told him/her/it that is dumb. They should have done like most companies and made-up some bullshit, yet legal, reason for it not getting the job.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:18pm
Valdearg: I do agree that it shouldn't be legal. That's for sure.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:14pm
Valdearg: @AE: Doubtful. Again, it's perfectly legal.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:39pm
Andrew Eisen: I don't think you're right but I really don't know and don't have the time to find out. However things actually are, it's very clear how they actually should be.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:34pm
Valdearg: "just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal." I would disagree. If there's no laws against it, it makes it perfectly legal. It's definitely not right, but perfectly legal to do.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: Meaning in 29 states, private sector discrimination against gays is perfectly legal.. Sickening.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:33pm
Valdearg: 19 states have no protections, and another 10 only have protections for public sector jobs.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:32pm
Andrew Eisen: Well, most businesses have equal rights policies in place and just because there's no specific state level protection for it, doesn't make discrimination right or legal. Still, no argument against adding such protections.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: More information. Apparently, it's worse than I actually thought.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:28pm
Valdearg: Check the link. Apparently, its more like 20 states that have no protections.
Login or register to post shouts