• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Treyarch says creating an inclusive working environment is its top priority

cragarmi

Member
If you run a large company, and it doesn't reflect the diverse nature of society, then there is clearly more you could be doing to encourage that particular group to apply, or retain that groups workforce. It doesn't mean you should hire based on that attribute. For example in the UK many companies have guaranteed interview schemes for disabled people, providing then meet the requirements of the job spec, it doesn't mean they get hired, unless they were the best candidate.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius

The statement was released via Treyarch’s social media channels this week, over a month after co-studio head Dan Bunting left the company following an investigation into reports that he sexually harassed a female employee.

“Our goal as a studio is to make awesome games for the world to enjoy,” Treyarch’s statement reads. “Having the privilege to pursue that endeavor is made possible because of Treyarch’s people: we are a studio comprised of smart, talented, world-class creative professionals who seek to perform at our best.

“Our culture has no room for sexism, harassment, racism, bigotry, discrimination, or bullying,” it continues. “As we move forward, providing a safe, diverse, inclusive working environment so that all may thrive will be our highest priority.

“Everyone at Treyarch is drawn to game development because we possess a deep love for the artistry of video games and the magic that can create moments that matter. This is a moment that matters and it starts by being better.”

Some social media commenters initially interpreted the message as being a disingenuous corporate statement from Treyarch’s parent company Activision Blizzard, which is currently facing multiple regulatory investigations over alleged sexual assaults and harassment of female employees.



Months of soul and relationship wrecking crunch? Fine. Waves of people hired and fired as crunch begins and ends? Fine… but we want to abuse everyone equally. Ah social victory :).

More like HR and the parent company saw and feared online reaction and threw some people under the bus and jumped on any new policy that can:
  • Make the company look good
  • Justify more surveillance… I mean active monitoring
  • Keep workforce divided alongside lines they themselves setup (one dxtreme D&I policy a day keeps the Unions away)
  • Justify hiring and firing of employees by even more nebulous means thanks to aforementioned inclusive policies (when we the HR policy is confusing, abstracted, complicated, or a mix of the above it is only bad for the employee most of the time)
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
If you run a large company, and it doesn't reflect the diverse nature of society, then there is clearly more you could be doing to encourage that particular group to apply, or retain that groups workforce. It doesn't mean you should hire based on that attribute. For example in the UK many companies have guaranteed interview schemes for disabled people, providing then meet the requirements of the job spec, it doesn't mean they get hired, unless they were the best candidate.
You can do a LOT by improving the pool of candidates / sourcing, but it is very unrealistic to expect the diverse nature of society regardless of where it is located, regardless of how many companies there are, without balancing companies that have a higher than average percentage of <insert group> (what do you use to define the right percentage? Do you weigh percentages of groups with the position they have at the company? How many points is a <insert group> CEO worth? Is position important [it is, part of this is a money and power struggle, nobody gives a shit about representations in the coal mining community and few would give a shit if a war were to start]? Does everything in society have to reflect the diverse nature of the entire country or is it a decision you make on a council to council level?)…
 
pretty sure most major studios that have moved to this 'Incivility' BS have ended up putting out nothing but trash. Development studios should really be hiring based on skill and experience rather than hitting HR check boxes
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
That's because gaming is a heavily skewed industry towards white and asian males working there. And in this day of diversity and such, they got to PR they are opposite that when in reality their employee pool is probably 90% white/asian guys. 10% everyone else.

See my post above #30.

That's taken from Treyarch's own site what their employee pool looks like. It looks literally about 90+% white guys. I ballparked about 120 people, and I see one Black guy on the left, and two women. One woman is between the E and A, and the other is about 3 rows back of the first E. Some guys have slightly darker skin so I'll assume they are Latino.

Dont get me wrong. I have no problem with any company hiring the best fit. If it means 100% whites or 100% Latinos, do what's right for the business and skillset. BUt dont give this PR BS about diversity and shit.

Seeing a bit of quick wins by controlling positions of power / getting brownie points. If you get 20 candidates and women are 1% and minorities too (again leaving aside what being a minority is… language and cultural diversity is still important, just less news worthy… people still emigrate), the chance you are able to find people passing the same high standards are lower in those categories. Increasing talent pool diversity is the challenge… but of course it is the tough problem to crack because it is related to how the economy performs, how the school system performs, access to books and computers, time to practice (some people have a lot less free time than others).
You have an idea of what a more balanced western society would look like and you want to get there without addressing any of the foundations (because you cannot, it takes too long, it costs money, and it is too politically messy to achieve).

Do notice that in most of the “recommendations” that come to hiring managers when this is discussed there is more and more a suggested “change in standards”, the interview itself and how you judge people needs to take their gender, their race, and other factors in the equation and adapt. This is as always something that sounds noble (actually a fight against the so called blind audition because it does not allow you to just judge performance), but it is classical speaking out of both sides of your mouth: you are saying that of course you can hire the best but also that you want to adapt the interview and even adapt your standards (should we hire for fit? Should we accept people less competent and see them grow afterwards maybe? Etc…).
 

nush

Gold Member
"Fuck you straight white guy, we're going to actively discriminate against you regardless of your skill, experience or how well you interviewed. Come back wearing a dress so you can give us a twofer on the diversity quota."
 

mejin

Member
They are not saying hire people based on identify. Human beings are very diverse, so if you attract, hire and develop the most talented people then your company will also be diverse. In no way does diversity require hiring people for their identity.

If they are telling the world usually It means "quotas".
 
I installed War Zone to give it another try on consoles.

Was given some cinematic of a diverse strike team landing on a pacific island on a top mission to stop Hitler, rolled eyes and uninstalled.
 

MidGenRefresh

*Refreshes biennially
You don't need diversity, you need talent. Look how not diverse this group of developers are. They still managed to create some of the most kick-ass games ever.

Bungie-Team_09-11-08.jpg
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
They are not saying hire people based on identify. Human beings are very diverse, so if you attract, hire and develop the most talented people then your company will also be diverse. In no way does diversity require hiring people for their identity.

The problem is what we understand as diverse (and the conversation is changing and forcing to consider those factors… in determining the interview panel, how to interpret embellished CV’s [“a cultural thing”, not joking], how to ask questions based on the gender and ethnicity, how to change standards to ensure you fix the representation problem, etc…) is a French guy and a Spanish one not diverse unless you also learn that one or either is non white? Does their sexual preference and identified gender count? One could have a very diverse team of caucasian males in a EU company: think about Russia + Slovakia + France + Italy (good luck explaining to Italians they are all the same and there is no cultural diversity in that country) + U.K. + Spain… it sounds diverse, post a picture that maybe shows they are all white guys and bam! Clear D&I issue and racist agenda.

A diverse team that can connect and work well together, team fit is a thing, w tends to perform better. Problem is when you have a target of what diverse means to you and cognitive dissonance when trying to rationalise things and enact anything out of your ideals (also there is never a discussion of a target state, after the battle has been won so to speak, when you can tackle the issue of “class of students/teams/groups needs familiar figures of power they can identify with in terms of race and/or gender” vs “white cis-gender boys needs to stop having problems identidying with figures of power different from them on race and/or gender”. The latter is true, it is something that should be surpassed, but at some point you need to say the former is wrong then, you must see a society where the former is also wrong… but yea, I am digressing.
 

GymWolf

Member
1. Messed up company
2. Messed up employees
3. Social media whoring

Sounds like a video game company to me. And they cant be that anti-discrimination and pro-diversity. Probably 99% of their employees are White dudes. Although I do see one Black guy on the left at the tip of the W. And it looks like one female between the E and A in the black tshirt.


DYhxlr9.jpg


I just checked my own company's website and various Twitter accounts. The corporate home page is your usual links and articles about brands, career page, About Us, management team, investor relations etc.... The Twitter accounts of various product lines promote the products. No politics or anything.

What shocking concepts!
Lol that pic is like looking inside a box of skimmed milk :lollipop_squinting:
 
Last edited:

JackSparr0w

Banned
They are not saying hire people based on identify. Human beings are very diverse, so if you attract, hire and develop the most talented people then your company will also be diverse. In no way does diversity require hiring people for their identity.
That's exactly what they are saying. if they wanted to purely hire on talent and merit they would blank out CV names and pictures but then they would end up with the same old white dudes they are trying to avoid.

Gender and race quotas are part of the industry now including the company I used to work.
 
Last edited:

Coolwhhip

Neophyte
I have an idea for a comic, wish I could draw.

Panel 1: It's the year 2058. A Chinese family is happily walking through New York.
Panel 2: As they keep walking you notice all the buildings have Chinese signs on them, including the World Trade Center.
Panel 3: Then you see that all the people walking in New York are actually Chinese.
Panel 4: The family walks past a homeless person that lies on the street.
Panel 5: As you look closer you see it's a very underfed white man with long blue hair, he wears a dress with "LBGQT lives matter" on it.
Panel 6: The family stops and the Chinese man gives the homeless person some Yuan. "Here have some money for food, you look like you're dying man."
Panel 7: The weakened homeless person slowly sits up and replies "Did you just misgender me?! Get the fuck out of here you bigot!". And he throws the money away.
Panel 8: The Chinese man chuckles and walks away with his family.
 
Last edited:

Samrf89

Member
why don't they just say it? just say "we need more black people, trans, and women and less straight white men." stop hiding behind buzzwords like a bunch of pussies.
 
Last edited:
Being a place that attracts, retains and develops top talent while providing a good working environment will help them do that.

Top talent = meritocracy. So I look forward to them having a 95% white male staff. Because purely looking at the numbers/talent in the industry if they want top talent I'm sure that's what it will look like. I mean I'm sure they wouldn't be hiring less talented/passionate people just to placate a vocal minority of people who don't even play videogames over hiring the best people for the job.
 

kyussman

Member
Any normal fucking business shouldn't have to state such things and make such a big deal about it......but all these fucking studios are constantly being outed for doing nasty shit,so it just makes it feel like they are covering their arses tbh.
 

Woopah

Member
Except, when you hear ANY tech or gaming company use the words "diversity" or "inclusion", this is EXACTLY what they are stating that they're going to do. This is why these words need to be called out foe the red flags they are.
If they are telling the world usually It means "quotas".
Not necessarily. Nintendo reports on diversity and inclusion and have explicitly stated that they want to increase the proportion of women at their company. Yet they don't have any quotas or even targets.
The problem is what we understand as diverse (and the conversation is changing and forcing to consider those factors… in determining the interview panel, how to interpret embellished CV’s [“a cultural thing”, not joking], how to ask questions based on the gender and ethnicity, how to change standards to ensure you fix the representation problem, etc…) is a French guy and a Spanish one not diverse unless you also learn that one or either is non white? Does their sexual preference and identified gender count? One could have a very diverse team of caucasian males in a EU company: think about Russia + Slovakia + France + Italy (good luck explaining to Italians they are all the same and there is no cultural diversity in that country) + U.K. + Spain… it sounds diverse, post a picture that maybe shows they are all white guys and bam! Clear D&I issue and racist agenda.

A diverse team that can connect and work well together, team fit is a thing, w tends to perform better. Problem is when you have a target of what diverse means to you and cognitive dissonance when trying to rationalise things and enact anything out of your ideals (also there is never a discussion of a target state, after the battle has been won so to speak, when you can tackle the issue of “class of students/teams/groups needs familiar figures of power they can identify with in terms of race and/or gender” vs “white cis-gender boys needs to stop having problems identidying with figures of power different from them on race and/or gender”. The latter is true, it is something that should be surpassed, but at some point you need to say the former is wrong then, you must see a society where the former is also wrong… but yea, I am digressing.
You could have a very diverse team of white people yes. Even though they share the same skin colour they could be very different in terms of age, class, gender, nationality, sexuality, introvert/extrovert etc etc. Diversity of a team should never be judged based purely on a photo.
Are you sure they mean that when they mention "inclusion" and "diversity"?
I can't speak for all companies, different ones will do things differently. But for the ones I've worked with the whole reason for inclusion and diversity was to attract, retain and develop the best talent. That was the primary goal of their efforts. For example, one team found that the company's development programmes were largely targeted at younger people in their 20s and 30s, so they made changes so that the older top talent (in their 50s and 60s) were being developed as well.
That's exactly what they are saying. if they wanted to purely hire on talent and merit they would blank out CV names and pictures but then they would end up with the same old white dudes they are trying to avoid.

Gender and race quotas are part of the industry now including the company I used to work.
Blanking out CV names and photos is exactly the type of thing I think they should be doing. Going for quotas (especially race quotas) is pretty stupid in my opinion, so I'm sorry to hear your former employer took that route.
Top talent = meritocracy. So I look forward to them having a 95% white male staff. Because purely looking at the numbers/talent in the industry if they want top talent I'm sure that's what it will look like. I mean I'm sure they wouldn't be hiring less talented/passionate people just to placate a vocal minority of people who don't even play videogames over hiring the best people for the job.
This is precisely the kind of baseless assumptions that is the issue. Even leaving out race, do you really believe that women make up less than 10% of top talent? If so, why?
 

DeaDPo0L84

Member
No, it doesn't. Being inclusive is making sure that you are able to attract talent from all areas, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, etc. etc. In the specific case of Activision, they can recruit more women into the company and into leadership positions by fixing their sexist work culture and stamping out harassment. They don't need to (and should not be) hiring people just because their women.
I can guarantee you if they had 20 positions open and blindly interviewed enough people to fill said positions and say 15 new hires were straight white males they'd suddenly pull a reason out of their ass why they have to go to the next candidate, this is the new definition of "inclusivity" as the safe space generation continues to redefine language.
 

Woopah

Member
I can guarantee you if they had 20 positions open and blindly interviewed enough people to fill said positions and say 15 new hires were straight white males they'd suddenly pull a reason out of their ass why they have to go to the next candidate, this is the new definition of "inclusivity" as the safe space generation continues to redefine language.
That's not been my experience (sexuality would never come up in the hiring process for example) so we can't say with any certainty that this would be Treyarch's position. There's a massive massive gap between "our culture has no room for sexism, racism and bullying" and "we don't want to hire white men". Treyarch's chairman is a white man, their lead director is a white man, their lead writer is a white man and their audio director is a white man. They clearly have no issue hiring and promoting white men.
 
Last edited:

Unk Adams

Banned
Any normal fucking business shouldn't have to state such things and make such a big deal about it......but all these fucking studios are constantly being outed for doing nasty shit,so it just makes it feel like they are covering their arses tbh.
Because they're actually abnormal people who seem like they have some sort of ulterior motive. Your average person already knows to treat people equally and appreciates diversity but they don't have to point it out every second. It reminds me of the creepy male feminists who constantly tell us that women should be treated equally (something average men already do) but then get charged with sexual harassment because it turns out they were the creeps all along. The "woke" people trying to lecture are the actual racists, sexists, etc. these days and are very hateful people which is why they have to hide behind this stuff.
 

Tommi84

Member
Ughh...how do we call situation when someone is being employed not because someone is the best candidate, but is female/minority/lbgt+ member?

I think I have the word at the tip of my tongue, but can't recall it.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
The problem is what we understand as diverse (and the conversation is changing and forcing to consider those factors… in determining the interview panel, how to interpret embellished CV’s [“a cultural thing”, not joking], how to ask questions based on the gender and ethnicity, how to change standards to ensure you fix the representation problem, etc…) is a French guy and a Spanish one not diverse unless you also learn that one or either is non white? Does their sexual preference and identified gender count? One could have a very diverse team of caucasian males in a EU company: think about Russia + Slovakia + France + Italy (good luck explaining to Italians they are all the same and there is no cultural diversity in that country) + U.K. + Spain… it sounds diverse, post a picture that maybe shows they are all white guys and bam! Clear D&I issue and racist agenda.

A diverse team that can connect and work well together, team fit is a thing, w tends to perform better. Problem is when you have a target of what diverse means to you and cognitive dissonance when trying to rationalise things and enact anything out of your ideals (also there is never a discussion of a target state, after the battle has been won so to speak, when you can tackle the issue of “class of students/teams/groups needs familiar figures of power they can identify with in terms of race and/or gender” vs “white cis-gender boys needs to stop having problems identidying with figures of power different from them on race and/or gender”. The latter is true, it is something that should be surpassed, but at some point you need to say the former is wrong then, you must see a society where the former is also wrong… but yea, I am digressing.
The dumb thing about diversity PR is it doesn't even make sense a portion of the time.

The point of diversity hires is basically twofold.

1. If you balance out the genders and racial make up of the employee pool, it means the talent automatically increases. A ridiculous claim as I have never seen any company or government even provide proof of that. They will claim it leads to better results, but I've never seen a results chart.

2. For economy sake, it helps out some groups of people with a good paying job to elevate that group's economic status.

Well, who said every female and minority magically improves the talent pool just because they walk in the door looking different? I thought anti-discrimination supporters say all people can be the same regardless of how they look, so what's up with the "add special needs group = immediate boost"?

Who says every special needs group person is broke and needs some leniency in getting a job to perk up the wages?

Another forced diversity initiative I have never ever seen settled is if a company wants to force it for sake of ratios, which ratio do you go after?

1. The country demographic..... around 70% whites/30% minorities, and 50/50 men and women?

2. The equal parts diversity (pizza slice way)...... 20% white, 20% black, 20% asian, 20% latino etc..... and 50/50 men and women

3. The industry demographic..... whatever it is. 60/40 or 40/60 racial splits, and 80/20 or 20/80 men and women

So make up your mind.
 
Last edited:

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Well IW has the best COD and they basically beg Treyarch to finish games because Sledgehammer is so terrible.


treyarch-logo-attack-of-the-fanboy.jpg
 
You don't need diversity, you need talent. Look how not diverse this group of developers are. They still managed to create some of the most kick-ass games ever.

Bungie-Team_09-11-08.jpg

It's stuff like this that shows how fucked up western society is.

This IS a diverse dev team. If you look at the number of non-white employees, their proportion in the team reflects the proportion of those minorities in society at large, so this team IS representative; which is the goal progressives are often pushing towards.

It baffles me to hear people say how workplaces should reflect society and then baulk when they see a company full of mostly white people when the wider society they want companies to reflect is made up of mostly fucking white people. Like, we've already arrived at what you're campaigning for. So what you really want is not for companies to reflect society but for disproportionately high numbers of minorities represented, which overwhelmingly disadvantages qualified white people in the workforce for no reason other than racism (i.e. hatred of white people).
 
How about focusing on having talented and skilled people working and not hiring a fat blue haired trans so you can post it on social media as an "inclusive" company.

Im so tired of fitting everyone's narrative instead of just looking at people as talented/not talented to work at the company. Now everyone needs to be identified.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
One could have a very diverse team of caucasian males in a EU company: think about Russia + Slovakia + France + Italy (good luck explaining to Italians they are all the same and there is no cultural diversity in that country) + U.K. + Spain… it sounds diverse, post a picture that maybe shows they are all white guys and bam! Clear D&I issue and racist agenda.
It baffles me to hear people say how workplaces should reflect society and then baulk when they see a company full of mostly white people when the wider society they want companies to reflect is made up of mostly fucking white people. Like, we've already arrived at what you're campaigning for. So what you really want is not for companies to reflect society but for disproportionately high numbers of minorities represented, which overwhelmingly disadvantages qualified white people in the workforce for no reason other than racism (i.e. hatred of white people).
It's a visual world.

All white people are piled together as one homogenous pot. So a bunch of white people from South Africa, Russia, Iceland and USA - all different backgrounds, culture and language - are somehow assumed to be "the same kind of white folks".

Who knew.

I'm no anthropologist or HR manager, but I'd assume at first blush they are different even though skin deep they might look the same.
 
Last edited:

Corndog

Banned

The statement was released via Treyarch’s social media channels this week, over a month after co-studio head Dan Bunting left the company following an investigation into reports that he sexually harassed a female employee.

“Our goal as a studio is to make awesome games for the world to enjoy,” Treyarch’s statement reads. “Having the privilege to pursue that endeavor is made possible because of Treyarch’s people: we are a studio comprised of smart, talented, world-class creative professionals who seek to perform at our best.

“Our culture has no room for sexism, harassment, racism, bigotry, discrimination, or bullying,” it continues. “As we move forward, providing a safe, diverse, inclusive working environment so that all may thrive will be our highest priority.

“Everyone at Treyarch is drawn to game development because we possess a deep love for the artistry of video games and the magic that can create moments that matter. This is a moment that matters and it starts by being better.”

Some social media commenters initially interpreted the message as being a disingenuous corporate statement from Treyarch’s parent company Activision Blizzard, which is currently facing multiple regulatory investigations over alleged sexual assaults and harassment of female employees.


And here I thought they made games.
 
Top Bottom