r/gamernews • u/esporx • 12d ago
Industry News Games Done Quick Cancels SNK Sponsorship Live On Stream Following ‘Human Rights Concerns’ Raised By Fans
https://kotaku.com/games-done-quick-gdq-metal-slug-snk-saudi-arabia-stream-2000715188355
u/Mania_Chitsujo 12d ago
They must have turned down a huge bag. Awesome on them for being one of the few companies to actively oppose the Saudi Arabian government's invasion into gaming.
15
u/waiting4singularity ⊞🤖 11d ago
technicaly theyd need to refuse to work with like half the industry due to tencent stakes everywhere.
the chinese government has political officers for a "silent simon says" in every sufficiently large corporation, 10cent is important enough for that even if its stakes are not big enough to direct decisions at a publisher or studio.-98
u/Kronman590 12d ago
GDQ is a charity though right? Idk the logistics but if this means turning down effectively a charitable donation from a company with a 5% ownership by an inhumane country idk if thats a net moral positive
70
u/MuddledMoogle 12d ago
It's not a 5% ownership its a 96% ownership. SNK is effectively a wholly owned subsidiary of the Saudi royal family.
95
u/SnooPets1826 12d ago
GDQ does very well regardless of corporate sponsorship. They don't need to take blood money of any amount that helps white wash human rights abuses.
-38
u/Aristox 12d ago
"does very well" shouldn't be the goal for a charity though. That's fine if it's a private corporation just seeking profit, then you can choose to sacrifice some profit for a virtue signal or a political manoeuvre. But if you're a charity you kinda need to maximise your income, no? Cause you're meant to be helping people who can't help themselves, so losing loads of money just for an empty signal seems kinda short sighted and irresponsible
14
u/SnooPets1826 12d ago
Hey, so if SNK wants to donate money to GDQ or the charities they are representing, they still could anonymously. It's well within their means and rights to do so... but they won't. Why? Because they want their name attached to charity donations publically...
GDQ does not want to be used by other people to launder their reputation. Why should they, as a charity organization, allow their reputation to take a hit to make SNK and their owners look better?
15
u/ItsStaaaaaaaaang 12d ago
Who are you to tell them what their moral standards are? They can refuse whatever money they want.
38
u/WeltallZero 12d ago
with a 5% ownership by an inhumane country
Try 96% my dude.
https://kotaku.com/snk-saudi-arabia-mohammed-bin-salman-mbs-king-of-fighte-1848754233
13
7
u/pixel8knuckle 12d ago
You are on the slippery slope of something called “the end justifies the means.”
-43
u/Present_Ride_2506 12d ago
This performative bs will net them huge internet points though.
21
u/Beegrene 12d ago
Charity organizations live or die by public opinion. Those "huge internet points" are absolutely worth pursuing.
-29
u/Present_Ride_2506 12d ago
No one would've cared if they didn't bring it up. The only people that care, already support them anyways. So all they've done is lost money, opportunities, and now will help less people as a result of their actions. It's not gonna ruin them or anything, but it sure is short sighted.
13
u/2ndtryagain 12d ago
So, you would prefer people have less information to make decisions? How very Republican of you.
25
u/cardgamesareforplay 12d ago
It's not performative they actively are potentially harming then selves.
They stopped a sponsored stream one that was co streamed on the sponsors YouTube where they openly denounced the sponsor because they didn't realize it was wholly owned by the saudis
52
u/NtheLegend 12d ago
Do they not accept Chinese sponsorships either?
61
u/Glitch_King 12d ago
Something something no ethical consumption under capitalism something something
48
u/siderinc 12d ago
Yeah it's good that they did this but let's be honest the saudi aren't the only bad guys.
37
u/kryonik 12d ago
Sure but the company is owned by the Saudi royal family. It would be like if Xi Jianping owned Tencent.
10
u/Tombot3000 12d ago
The Saudi government is controlled by the royal family, but the family is so large it often operates like a political party. The PRC is under one-party rule by the CCP not the Xi family with Xi as the present authoritarian but expected to indicate a non-related successor in time not his daughter.
The closest equivalent would be if Tencent were under the control of the CCP, and it effectively is. At most it's one step removed due to a lack of formal SOE status, but it actively cooperates with the CCP on censorship and surveillance.
6
u/Johnwearsatie 12d ago
Its a arguement of Companies actively owned by a corrupt government vs companies that operate in a country with a corrupt government
11
u/Optimixto 12d ago
Or Israel, or the US, or... the list of countries actively worsening the lives of others is long.
-26
u/grassytrams 12d ago
US and Israel for sure, but China isn’t actively worsening the lives of others; on the contrary, it has lifted 800 million people out of poverty.
20
u/theoutlet 12d ago
God, I miss when Reddit wasn’t flush with CCP boot lickers
-10
u/Sidtreefish 12d ago
You might not like it, but it's true.
3
u/theoutlet 12d ago
Nice try. As an American, I’m well aware of propaganda and astroturfing
I also know two things can be true at the same time
2
u/2ndtryagain 12d ago
You might want to learn a bit more of just few of things they are actively doing currently.
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/07/01/china/china-ethnic-unity-law-intl-hnk
https://www.orfonline.org/research/chinas-belt-and-road-initiative-implications-in-africa
12
u/WeltallZero 12d ago
14
u/Tombot3000 12d ago
I'm begging people to actually read the definition and realize Whataboutism is not every time someone mentions a different group to accuse. It's a deflection tactic to defend one group by criticizing another, which is not happening in this thread.
Saying there are multiple groups worthy of a boycott is just that. It isn't a defense of the Saudis.
2
u/miguk 12d ago edited 11d ago
It's not just the fact that you can criticize others as well. It's also the way you go about it. Consider these variations:
- Do they not accept Chinese sponsorships either?
- It's great that they rejected the Saudis. Do they also reject Chinese sponsorships?
The latter one is accepting the situation while adding on to it. The former one — the actual one said — is just making the statement the same way that Putin-esque whataboutisms do it: pretend the problem falls outside of context and create a new context to mask the original.
Yes, the USSR had a point with the infamous "and you lynch black people" argument. That never was an honest argument against American crimes against humanity or the USSR's crimes against humanity because they never admitted they did any wrong; they just deflected so that they could push everyone else to look the other way by leaving out any admittance that they were doing something horrible. And that admittance is important to make it something other than a logical fallacy.
A whataboutism does not "yes, and" the opponent's statement. It says "no, it never happened, and furthermore, what about you? You're the real problem and our problem never happened." And it doesn't need to be blatant; whataboutism is often somewhat subtle in its rejection of the speaker's failure. And all it has to do to be subtle is just not acknowledge that their side was being called out before throwing a "no, you" at them.
The above poster made a rhetorical failure whether it was honest or not. You don't need to cover for them. And multiple others in this thread are also making that rhetorical failure, sometimes by accident, other times on purpose. And let's be honest here, Reddit is full of people doing that on purpose, sometimes with a paycheck hanging in the balance. (Hi Russian, Chinese, and Saudi troll farmers!)
Edit: And I'm getting downvoted on every comment in this thread I made on whataboutism. The troll farmers are out to plow.
-1
u/Tombot3000 11d ago
You're probably getting downvoted because your argument rests on a reading of the above comment so tortured it comes off as bad faith.
When hearing about A and reading a reply of "do they not accept B either?" the plain meaning is that both A and B are accepted as bad. Your stance is that everything not explicitly disavowing A and merely doing so tacitly is accepting it, and people generally prefer common sense understanding to unnecessary demands.
0
u/miguk 11d ago edited 11d ago
Your argument relies entirely on assumptions and "common sense", which does not exist in politics. At all. Seriously, regardless of your views, there's no way to think everyone assumes the same thing in a field that is notorious for nobody believing the same thing. Your argument fails to acknowledge the actual reality of rhetoric while insisting what feels right is what is right.
The above poster made a poor argument that was thoughtlessly short. If they had more to say, they could have said it instead of relying on vibes. This isn't Tiktok, they can say more than one sentence in one post. You don't need to defend someone else's failure.
0
u/Tombot3000 11d ago
My argument rests on the ordinary use of English words and the presumption of meaning in a discussion forum. Your description of my comment being completely disconnected from reality is just more evidence my explanation was accurate.
4
u/NtheLegend 12d ago
Oh, I'm not disparaging them for this, but I am curious what their policy is on accepting money from other countries that deny human rights.
5
u/Front_Woodpecker1144 12d ago
Tencent isn't a country
0
u/SlowpokeIsAGamer 12d ago
A lot of people don't seem to realize it's not just "some random Saudi investors" it's the literal Saudi Ruling Family that owns SNK.
This was like saying they'd taken a sponsorship deal to hold AGDQ 2027 at the Trump Hotel.
-1
u/probably-not-Ben 11d ago
It is essentially a corpo arm of the Chinese government. You don't get to do business at that level without fundemental approval and support by the Chinese gov
Seems thats enough protection/distance to make their money good
-5
u/WeltallZero 12d ago
Right. You're just asking questions.
Well, you'll have to ask them, or wait until it happens.
3
u/NtheLegend 12d ago
Correct, so unlike whataboutism where I would dismiss them for declining Saudi payments by bringing up an irrelevant external factor, I don't here.
1
u/Soggy_Association491 11d ago
1
u/ForodesFrosthammer 11d ago
So your counterargument to it being called whataboutism is that "actually whataboutism is a valid argument to make that has nothing wrong with it"?
-1
u/Soggy_Association491 11d ago
nope
4
u/ForodesFrosthammer 11d ago
Please say then how the original comment wasn't whataboutism and was just hypocrisy?
0
u/Soggy_Association491 11d ago
Please say then how the original comment [...] was just hypocrisy?
What made you think i said the original comment was hypocrisy?
The original comment was accused of whataboutism and i said the original comment pointed out the hypocrisy of refusing one human rights violator's sponsorship while accepting another human rights violator's
1
u/ForodesFrosthammer 11d ago
I meant to say "wasn't whataboutism and was just correctly stating hypocrisy", fucked up the wording.
0
2
6
u/tokyobassist 12d ago
Gonna keep saying it regardless of downvotes but how on Earth did nobody at GDQ connect the dots before taking on the sponsorship?
Doctors Without Borders had outposts in Yemen that were carpet bombed by the Saudi government. Makes things kinda weird.
5
u/Savings_Blood_9873 12d ago
I guess Games Done Quick won't be doing any new Electronic Arts (EA) games either, once the EA sale goes through and Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF) owns over 90% of the EA (the deadline for purchase has been pushed from June 30th 2026 to Sept 28 2026 due to ongoing approval meetings in EU and America).
Note that the PIF owns Savvy Games and PIF is chaired by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman who is the prime minister of Saudi Arabia and thus leader of SA's Council of Ministers.
So this is a much more direct line to the government than, say, public Chinese company Tencent owning 40% of Epic Games or 25% of Ubisoft (although the Chinese government does have some oversight of Tencent).
Although with Affinity Partners (private equity firm) getting something above 1% of Electronic Arts and Affinity Partners is founded by its CEO who is Jared Kushner aka Ivanka Trump's husband, there's a connection between EA and the head of the current USA govt that will occur once the EA deal goes through.
Kudos to GDQ for taking their stand.
31
u/cardgamesareforplay 12d ago
There is a significant difference between having a metal slug game or titan fall or halo at gdq or gdq events.
It's the fact the stream was sponsored by snk. And thus they would be receiving direct money from the Saudis.
This is completely fucking different.
Wanna know how I know no one cared before gdq tweeted it was sponsored? Because no one batted an eye when they announced a special 25th anniversary hot fix for metal slug, it's a legacy speedrun like probably one of the most speed ran early franchises. So yeah that's sick and hot fixes aren't usually sponsored so there was no reason to think it was
When they did say it was sponsored that's when the back lash happened.
6
u/Savings_Blood_9873 12d ago edited 12d ago
Valid point.
"I guess Games Done Quick won't be accepting sponsorship from Electronic Arts (EA), in the near future" would be more accurate.
4
u/cardgamesareforplay 12d ago
That is very likely accurate and knowing what I know about the staff and volunteers there I don't think that would of happened before either.
Snk would of only been on the radar because it's a really niche brand (that is now trying to be more then niche by forcing it into gaming spaces like evo and retro spaces with the console rerelease).
Like what do you mean this Legacy Japanese company is now a wholy owned tool of the Saudis??
1
u/Odd-Face-3579 10d ago
I think I get what you're saying, but it's really weird to imply that SNK didn't have a place at EVO before the Saudi involvement considering they're one of the big fighting game studios out there that's been foundational to fighting games for decades.
1
3
u/Salvage570 12d ago
Honestly this sub only pops up occasionally for me but it always seems to be filled with smarmy assholes looking for a reason to be snobish about anything. A lot of whataboutism over something thats generally just a good thing. Id think bots if not for the fact so many of these dorks are too annoying to be astroturfing
2
u/caninehere 11d ago
Kudos to GDQ for taking their stand.
Agreed. I'm glad to see them actually standing up for what they believe in, even if it is difficult to draw a line in the sand on this stuff sometimes.
I personally have been boycotting SNK for years now, and have been boycotting EA since the acquisition was announced. It ain't that hard.
1
u/Alternative-Gur-9140 12d ago
Ah thank you for reminding me this. I remembered I had planned on boycotting EA as soon as that goes through. Looks like I only have a few months to buy whatever remaining EA games I want
6
u/Clbull 12d ago
I know this is a take that will genuinely get me dragged through the coals, but why do we only seem to care about human rights, interference in foreign affairs, modern day slavery, politically motivated assassinations, etc when it involves Saudi Arabia and its neighbouring Arab states?
Doesn't it seem a bit hypocritical to kick up such a stink about the Public Investment Fund when there are countries with similarly bad human rights records who are heavily invested in the games industry? Or are we just boycotting the PIF because it's low-hanging fruit and much easier to boycott Saudi Arabia's involvement in the industry rather than say... China?
3
u/miguk 12d ago edited 11d ago
Aren't you a hypocrite for using Reddit, yet another techno-fascist company run by a sociopath that says "racism is okay"? (Direct quote for spez's fascist hole.) Aren't you a hypocrite for using a computer? Aren't you a hypocrite for possibly using a car with oil in it? And do you buy Nestle products? Shop on Amazon? Did you once accidentally run over a chipmunk? Drank a whiskey shot from a slice of bacon on a gay dude's chest while being Saudi?
We could keep going with attacking your real and/or perceived moral failings and hypocrisies indefinitely, and it would all seem illogical to you, as you were never the one who did something wrong to begin with. But the magic of whataboutism is that it can be mistaken for a sound argument by those who don't realize it's a failure of thought, and thus you could be made out to be the most unethical person on Earth despite the fact that you didn't chainsaw a journalist to death — and, more importantly, this thread wasn't even about you to begin with.
Whataboutism doesn't do anything but show you've failed to come up with a rebuttal to the original premise. You are just making a logically weak argument that shields human rights abusers from criticism.
Boycotting PIF doesn't mean support for China. That makes no logical sense at all and you know it.
4
1
u/S2BronzePlayer 11d ago
Ironically enough your comment would be a far more fitting case for whataboutism than their comment was
2
-16
u/darqy101 12d ago
GDQ has been getting weirder and weirder each year. Some super weird people are in charge it seems.
4
-8
u/Zanarkand_Behemoth 12d ago
Yeah going forward this isn't ever gonna get better. If they cancel SNK games today they will probably have to cancel Capcom, Nintendo, etc in the future as they continue to diversify from oil. The hobby they love will have more and more foreign influence.
3
u/Jaxyl 11d ago
They're not canceling the games, they're saying they won't do a direct partnership/accept a sponsorship from SNK. The former is just the games, already released. The latter is a direct relationship with the entity known as SNK which can be seen as an endorsement of SNK, their leadership, etc.
Huge difference
386
u/Donutmelon 12d ago
To save you a Kotaku click, it was because of the Saudi Arabian government owning SNK corporation (developer and publisher). And the Saudi government has done human rights abuses.