So her we see Avellone using highly selective and misleading language to try to paint Feargus as the devil incarnate without technically lying (probably).
Let's unpick this:
MCA:
Financial Matters and Ethics: I also don’t know where the training for handling and responsibility for finances came from, but we didn’t see eye to eye on that, either, as I've said. It went beyond the transparency in finances - the biggest shock came when the matter arose about paying back employees (not the owners, but our employees) who had given up their paychecks to keep Obsidian from going bankrupt. When we did start getting money in the bank again after this bleak period, however, the company's spending began accelerating again. This made me uncomfortable, so at that time where our finances became healthy again, I brought up that since we had the means to do so, we should pay back the employees who gave up their paychecks to keep us going.
My comment was met with silence by all the owners.
I repeated the concern, but when I brought it up again, Feargus simply said, "we never promised we'd pay the employees back," as if that excused things - but paying the employees back didn’t seem like a technicality to me, this was the right thing to do.
He then said he wanted the matter dropped.
Fortunately, another owner did finally admit he agreed with me some time later (mostly because one of the unpaid employees confronted the owner on what was going on with it), he was someone Feargus would listen to, and when he brought it up (this time he asked for my support, even though he had been silent before), we were able to push Feargus into establishing a payback plan and get restitution for the employees who sacrificed for us - and this was well before any owner paychecks resumed (by this point, the owners were resolved to not getting paid back, so it wasn't a huge shift).
Overall, it seemed a shameful way to treat our employees who had sacrificed for us, and I wasn’t happy we even had to discuss compensating them – it didn’t seem to be something we should discuss, we should simply do it because it was the right thing to do.
So the scenario is that everyone, employee and owner alike, forcoes their pay for a time in order to save the company and presumably finish the current project to do so. Avellone says when money started to flow back as a result "spending began tro accelerate again" and the poor emplyeees were not given their back pay (and neither were the owners).
Spending on what, exactly? Conveniently Avellone does not tell us. Becasue it doesn't necessarily help him paint Feargus as the Devil Incarnate perhaps.
Perhaps the money was being spent on the next game development project (by Avellone's owen admission here is certainly didn't go into the owners pockets)?
Generally speaking the bigger the budget for a game then better it may turn out to be, the better it turns out to be the more likely it will get a very positive recenption by both public and critics alike, and the better both critical and public reception is the more likely the game is to become a big hit.
If a game is a big hit, becasue the develpoment costs are a fixed quanltity paid up front, the earnings from the game sky rocket. Feargus may well have taken the view that it was in the best interests of the future propserity and seecurity of everyone at the company, employee and owner alike to, to put the money into the next game rather than use it for backpay.
Avellone conveniently ignores this point. Nor does he enlighten us on what the profit share/bonus/pay review procedures are at Obsidian so we don't know what the average dev in the trenches stood to gain financially from the company having a big hit game.
But, whether you think Feargus was right or wrong, you cannot paint him as the Spawn of Satan for believing it was in everyones best intersts to put all resources available into the current game.
But again Avellone dissembles: he says Fearegus said "We didn't promise to pay them back". I'm sure Feargus did say that at one point in the discussion but I am absolutely sure tha's not all Feargus said, and it is by deliberately leaving out the rest that Avellone seeks to slander Feargus.
This is called "quote mining" and is a disreputable journalistic technique used to twist truth and blacken reputations. It is a favourite technique of internet trolls.
Then we come to the part about "mostly because one of the unpaid employees confronted the owner on what was going on with it". Again we see Avellone trying to twist the narrative by being highly selective with the information he deigns to divulge.
What did this employee confront Feargus about? Was it the principle of getting their back pay? Or was it a specific hardship directly casued by the pay freeze? Something like a bank threatebning to foprclose hgis moprtgage? His kids getting threatened witrh expulsionb from college for non-payment of fees? His mother needing an operation he had to pay for?
Conveniently Avellone does not tell us becasue he obviously wants to put his own spin on the decisions Feargus made to try to blacken his reputation. Why is this important?
Becasue if Feargus was confronted with a genuine case of hardship caused by the pay freeze and realised he had to get this dude his back pay he would have realised he would have to give everybody else their back pay as well or it would not only be seen as totally unfair but would actually be totally unfair.
So: meet Feargus, the Devil Incarnate. Yeah, right.
But what truly sickens me about Avellone's supposed oh-so-heartfelt sticking up for the little guy in the trenches and his carefully crafted half-truths, omissions and spins is that all this is so obviously designed to try to torpedo the Deadfire release, and who is that going to hurt the most?
Yeah, that's right Avellone. The little guy in the trenches. Where the ♥♥♥♥ are you at. man?
