Quantic Dream Releases New Statement On Allegations

Having been the subject of unwanted attention over the last month due to allegations of a toxic and sexist working environment, Quantic Dream issues a new statement

The story is too old to be commented.
Malice-Flare251d ago

well, this seems more complicated than earlier reported...

rainslacker251d ago

Not really. Seems like a paper went ahead with a story by taking only one side of the issue, despite there being doubts even within that same story.

Most of the controversy after that was that it was re-reported by other media outlets that didn't give all the information, or even say that the people interviewed within the company were relatively happy with the working environment.

The original story seemed more like disgruntled former employees who were let go making claims against QD, with the biggest claim of the circulated images leaving a lot of question marks as to their source or context, and to what extent that the management of the company was aware of them, or if they condoned/participated in inappropriate behavior.

251d ago
Death251d ago


Some of the accusations are towards management. I’m not sure how they would be unaware. As for the 600+ photo shopped images, the source indicated was other employees and the context was racism, homophobia, and sexism. Maybe there were cats stuck in trees too, but those weren’t listed as creating a toxic work environment.

ShottyatLaw251d ago (Edited 251d ago )

It's about to get more interesting with the government's investigation coming out.

I don't have any opinion on the truth to the allegations, but making this statement a day before the government announces its intent to dig into the company certainly makes it seem that there's more bad days to come for QD.

rainslacker251d ago (Edited 251d ago )


Yes, but those images were provided by the complainant, and it said the general staff was unaware of them until said person released them for public view. Who and how many knew they existed, or to what extent is really unknown based on the initial article's report. That's why the source is questionable, because the paper didn't go far enough to tell if they were manufactured or if they were always there, or to see who saw them and when. Something said person would have access to the information relevant to that part. That aspect of the story was never verified, and it's unlikely that the paper could ever actually get that information once the person lodging the complaint actually left the company. It is only this person's word that management was aware of the extent of them, and Cage has said he's only seen a few of them, but not all of them, or the ones that were outside the bounds of good taste.


A government investigation can get the above information I assume, although I'm not overly familiar with French laws on that matter.

I personally don't feel making this statement before a government investigation starts to be out of the ordinary. They're responding again to a story which is again making the rounds in the news.

I suspect any government investigation would be more thorough than the papers investigation, and honestly, I feel the person complaining should have gone that route before dragging a company through the mud in the public space....particularly if they're seeking compensation. Going to the papers first seems more like retribution, and if it's anything like it is in the US, actually hurts most people's cases as it muddies the waters for a government investigation, and gives time for a company to do some clean up before said investigation starts.

My opinion on the matter may change when a authoritative investigation releases it's conclusions. But as it stands now, I find a few aspects of the topic questionable, and other parts seem more about there being too much familiarity among the staff which become too comfortable with one another over long periods of working together. That sort of thing can put off newer people of course, but it also isn't out of the ordinary, and also it isn't uncommon for management to be neglectful of those people's feelings, assuming such things are brought to their attention. It doesn't excuse the practice of course, but I've seen plenty of times where things that are too familiar get reigned in once it's brought to the attention of management or others. But without fail, those times do have to be brought to their attention for any action to be taken.

The question is, was such inappropriate behavior brought to the attention of management for them to actually do something about it, and if so, did they take appropriate steps to resolve the issue, or did they just remain neglectful of what they should have done.

Generally in cases like these, I prefer to have more facts before I assume the worst. While I doubt this particular instance will destroy the company, I know that knee-jerk reactions to unverifiable claims can cause problems for companies and their employees, or indeed cause them to go under.

ShottyatLaw251d ago

Yeah, I suspect that the statement's timing was just their attempt to stay in front of this story. I thought it was pretty much dead myself.

I'm not too familiar with these investigations, either. I understand that the trigger here is QD's possible receipt of public funding and/or tax breaks.

The cynic in me says that, if these French morality police are anything like our benevolent regulatory overlords here in the US, they'll keep digging until they find something to justify their existence.

And, yeah, the most important questions are always: When did you learn of these allegations, and what was your response? That's what recently led to those IGN firings.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 251d ago
OB1Biker251d ago (Edited 251d ago )

I mean, it should be simple really. How many employees in QD? If things are as bad as the journalist made it to be it should be easy to talk openly and 'expose' all the 'awful' working condition. How many people complained?
Why was the first article not more open in addressing all the interested parts in the first place?

rainslacker251d ago

The original article that broke this story actually did interview some of the staff of QD, and they said they were generally satisfied with the working conditions, and didn't notice any of the things being complained about.

It's not to say that some of the things being complained about didn't happen, but that the environment isn't as toxic as is being presented. It could be the one's complaining are just more sensitive to some things that most people at the company aren't fussed about.

I believe there were three people that complained....although I've only read about this trough translations which weren't always the best. The first was the IT manager who provided the pictures, the others were employees who were let go.

neutralgamer1992251d ago (Edited 251d ago )

Former disgruntled employee accuses ex employer what's new and people jump to a conclusion

OB1Biker251d ago

To be fair it's not just people jumping to a conclusion but more some journalists focusing on sensationalism. People are just conditioned in not questioning what they read in the press.

neutralgamer1992251d ago

True this me too movement hasn't been all good

TheOttomatic91251d ago

Unlike Weinstein I don’t think this scenario really has any merit but “journalists” need anything controversial to give them website clicks

lxeasy251d ago

I will reserve my opinion until further Evidence is brought to light. I hope its not true but if it is, shame on them.

rainslacker250d ago

The paper that released the article is apparently well respected in France. What I found interesting when reading the source was that a lot of people in the comments section were saying that the article itself wasn't up the the papers usual standard of ethical and extensive journalism, and seemed to leave a lot of relevant information out. Some even indicated that it seemed like a focused attack to express an actual bias, as opposed to an unbiased report of the topic at hand.

Frinker251d ago

My verdict: theyre guilty

UCForce251d ago (Edited 251d ago )

No, these people want QD to canceled their game. And I find that dumb. Now I know the company is not perfect but this is getting ridiculous. I swear freaking god if QD cancelled the game because of this allegation, there would be big problems.

Michiel1989251d ago

Even if all these allegations were proven true, do you really think Sony would let the game that is due for release soon be cancelled? This has nothing to do with cancelling the game, even if all the management will be fired there the game will be released.

Sono421251d ago

My verdict on you: You have no critical thought and can't think for yourself. It's okay there are alot of news sites out there pushing their agenda that do all of that silly thing called "Thinking" for you. How convenient.

rainslacker251d ago

Good to know that you cast judgement before all the facts are in. Shows real class on your part. Also shows you don't care to think critically or form your own opinion, and are more than happy to allow the press to tell you what is true and what isn't.

You must have a lot of pride knowing that you can't think for yourself.

trooper_251d ago

My verdict: You cling to anything negative just to trash Sony. Find something productive to do in your life.

CaptainObvious878250d ago

You must be part of the #metoo crowd.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 250d ago
Big_Game_Hunters251d ago

what are the allegations? shit writing?

Show all comments (26)