most surprising thing in this thread for me is that Chris Avellone is someone who would read 98+ pages of single thread on codex
granted, by design its thread about him
Those glassdoor reviews were telling the true.But, before you think I’m being overly kind, the poorly-performing nepotism hires would, yes, all be let go. They are evident even to the folks still at Obsidian, and it causes problems to this day to see some underperformers getting special treatment for no other reason than, well, "the owner knows them and drinks beer with them."
Yes, but his active refusal to acknowledge that anyone by the name of Josh Sawyer has ever existed is extremely off-brandTired: Josh Sawyer is secretly Roguey
Wired: Chris Avellone is secretly Roguey.
You have to admit stalking Deadfire development as extensively as he does and his idiosyncratic, polarizing code of honor is awfully Roguey-esque.
Yes, but his active refusal to acknowledge that anyone by the name of Josh Sawyer has ever existed is extremely off-brand
Tired: Josh Sawyer is secretly Roguey
Wired: Chris Avellone is secretly Roguey.
You have to admit stalking Deadfire development as extensively as he does and his idiosyncratic, polarizing code of honor is awfully Roguey-esque.
Parallel: I have never directly communicated with Josh identifying as Roguey.Yes, but his active refusal to acknowledge that anyone by the name of Josh Sawyer has ever existed is extremely off-brand
Tired: Josh Sawyer is secretly Roguey
Wired: Chris Avellone is secretly Roguey.
You have to admit stalking Deadfire development as extensively as he does and his idiosyncratic, polarizing code of honor is awfully Roguey-esque.
And there we had Fenstermaker tricked into saluting Roguey posts about how MCA writes too much...
Chris Avellone is/was Sawyer one of the bad guys @ Obsidian? Just ignore this question, if the answer is yes.
Wouldn't be immensely surprised if Sawyer was the one leaving to develop his own historical turn-based RPG after he got inspired by the success of Kingdom Come: Deliverance.
Can you confirm or deny whether the one who must not be named is indeed like a cat?I don't think we'll ever going to see a substantial criticism of Sawyer from Chris. Let me explain.
Sawyer is like a cat. He's a slightly moody and memetic creature, sort of amicable, if not always readily approachable which guarantees that he stays out of politics that could otherwise endanger prospects of him satisfying his feline urges. It follows that as a cat, he can do what he wants most of the time and people grew to accept his fluffy eccentricities. It can be also implied that his circumstance warrants he has a different set of definitions for phenomena such as fun and rewards. Just think about it; for a cat, walking from one side of the room to the other while musing on a fly it slaughtered the other day would be a perfectly fun and rewarding experience, however dull it would be to an average specimen of genus homo. Cat really is a romantic creature, and so is Sawyer. I think Chris realizes that better than almost anyone here because he has actually seen Sawyer's true form–his nature. He knows that criticizing Joshua Sawyer would be practically pointless, as criticism is beyond a cat's interest, or even understanding. Besides, who really wants to punish a cat that just goes about doing cat things? That would be heartless.