
Azure_Zero |

Gearbox, SEGA Sued Over Aliens: Colonial Marines
Looks like the shortcuts they made and using modified demo footage caught up to them.

Azure_Zero |

Morgen wrote:Erm, well let's save the term Justice for more important things here folks. Pretty please?agreed.
Still, it will be interesting to see what happens.
Agreed,
I'm still waiting on Justice for the Ontario Tax payers,
and the Liberal Party and it's former leader paying it all back with interest.

Sissyl |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I don't think it's wrong to speak of justice here. The entire video game industry has grown to adopt a severely ugly set of practices. They promote preordering, giving a new skin or some extra weapon in game if you preorder. People buy the game before it's out, making several great selling games on the lists before anyone actually played the damn things. Then they lock down reviews before release, with blacklisting reviewers so they don't get preview copies if they criticize the game/don't meet minimum scores that will guarantee a decent metacritic aggregate score. Then the game is released, and those who do not want to buy the game after all, they don't usually get their money back. Instead, they get store credit! To be sure, it's not like people get killed by this practice, but it is deplorable business ethics. If selling a game as something it clearly isn't costs something, then perhaps that kind of stunt will be avoided in the future.
The most serious problem, though, is all the bozos preordering games. Support the video game industry and STOP preordering!

Azure_Zero |

I agree that the industry has adopted some really ugly practices, like the lockdowning of reviews, blacklisting honest reviewers, and making refunding the game to store credit to name a number of them.
But pre-ordering is not the source of the problem.
I pre-ordered both Starcraft 2 WoL, and HotS and they were really good, and the trailers and teasers of the game matched the game.
Aliens CM on the other hand had trailers of extremely high quality graphics, AI and atmosphere, but the game never reached that same level when it was shipped.
Heck some guy made a patch to fix most of the problems that made the game bad, and the worse part is that they were simple fixes.
So the problem in this case is Major misrepresentation of the product they were selling.

Threeshades |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Still you can't be sure of the product you are buying if you buy it before it has been reviewed by anyone who you can be sure would rate it independently. Even if the demo footage you see is representative of the final product, it will never give you a clear picture of the game's overall quality.
As long as you blindly purchase something before you can even play it, you have no one to blame except for yourself for getting screwed for it. I learned this from ACM. And I think everyone should take this lesson away from this story.

Freehold DM |

Azure_Zero wrote:Update on LawsuitLooks like somebody can't admit their mistakes. Interesting.
Seriously, what did you expect them to say? You know how our legal system works. The litigants are going to have to prove their case beyond the shadow of a doubt. Of course the defendants are going to do everything they can to get this dismissed.

Necromancer |

Necromancer wrote:Seriously, what did you expect them to say? You know how our legal system works. The litigants are going to have to prove their case beyond the shadow of a doubt. Of course the defendants are going to do everything they can to get this dismissed.Azure_Zero wrote:Update on LawsuitLooks like somebody can't admit their mistakes. Interesting.
Part of me expected a quiet settlement and no precedent set.

![]() |

Necromancer wrote:Seriously, what did you expect them to say? You know how our legal system works. The litigants are going to have to prove their case beyond the shadow of a doubt. Of course the defendants are going to do everything they can to get this dismissed.Azure_Zero wrote:Update on LawsuitLooks like somebody can't admit their mistakes. Interesting.
Nitpicking: IIRC, in a US civil suit, the standard is preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.

Freehold DM |

Freehold DM wrote:Nitpicking: IIRC, in a US civil suit, the standard is preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.Necromancer wrote:Seriously, what did you expect them to say? You know how our legal system works. The litigants are going to have to prove their case beyond the shadow of a doubt. Of course the defendants are going to do everything they can to get this dismissed.Azure_Zero wrote:Update on LawsuitLooks like somebody can't admit their mistakes. Interesting.
This is why civil suits have gone crazy in this country...

![]() |

John Woodford wrote:This is why civil suits have gone crazy in this country...Freehold DM wrote:Nitpicking: IIRC, in a US civil suit, the standard is preponderance of evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.Necromancer wrote:Seriously, what did you expect them to say? You know how our legal system works. The litigants are going to have to prove their case beyond the shadow of a doubt. Of course the defendants are going to do everything they can to get this dismissed.Azure_Zero wrote:Update on LawsuitLooks like somebody can't admit their mistakes. Interesting.
My understanding is that it's been that way for most of the history of the US, and comes out of British Common Law. I expect Sebastian could provide something a little more definitive, though.