OH GOD BIOWARE WHAT THE FUCK HAVE YOU DONE

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

I'm also gonig to take the Never-Ending story to task.
And Labyrinth- there is no labryinth in it- it is clearly a maze.

Is it even really a maze? It's just a bigass land where there is a small maze in part of it. The start isn't even a maze. Just a corridor with a hidden exit.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Jurassic Park- Half those animals were like from the cretacous!
There was no chariots in Chariots of Fire, let alone flaming ones.

Originally Posted by Liz

Is it even really a maze? It's just a bigass land where there is a small maze in part of it. The start isn't even a maze. Just a corridor with a hidden exit.

Join my class action suit!

[Kim]

Actually, is it even legal to dislike a movie that stars David Bowie?

[Karrrrrrrrrrrresche]

Originally Posted by Liz

Actually, is it even legal to dislike a movie that stars David Bowie?

There's a legal precedent in which they declared that a certain percentage of screentime must involve David Bowie for a piece of media to apply for "Bowie immunity"

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by shiney

Explicitly stated in a EULA or purchase agreement? Or explicitly stated as a certainty in development? Or a spurious promise made by a producer during a hype interview. A statement in an interview (promise or otherwise) isn't necessarily a verbal contract and one would be hard pressed to prove it was.

Whole thing could have been sidestepped really. Like if they had a time bomb locked in the game that some 5 days after you finish the game, next time you load it some more shit happens that actually means something. That's the kind of tricky shit I would pull as a developer.

Actually the problem is the interviews took place after the content of the game was utterly finalized, so it would be rather easy to prove bad faith in those regards especially when the person being interviewed is the project lead and had a reasonable expectation that the interview would be used for or in promotional material.

[Loyal]

Well that's easy to say if you have enough disposable income to just go around buying multiple games.

I can't say I've ever had that kind of disposable income and I still find it remarkably easy to say. Unless you actively avoid all promotional material, all previews, all reviews, and buy it the very minute it becomes available, there's little reason not to be reasonably well-informed of your purchase. There's something to be said about avoiding spoilers, but come on. In this day and age?

The last twenty years have given me little reason to expect a given game will be exactly as developers have claimed it will be. Dunno why I'd expect different now.

You understand in other industries if you sell a product that isn't as advertised you can and SHOULD recover your funds right?

You don't actually believe that false advertising is totes okay funsies thing that people should just learn from in the future do you?

Why does the games industry get a free pass it's ridiculous every other industry already has this risk they haven't all fallen apart because of it.

You understand that I do not consider lying about the last ten minutes of the game sufficient grounds to invalidate the entertainment value of the remaining however many hours of gameplay, which, from my impressions reading around, seem to be fairly solid overall? That I therefore consider the idea of receiving a full refund on these grounds is ridiculous?

Can you "unplay" the game you had played up to that point?

These claims are what I'd expect if a developer had promised some spectacular, innovative Shooter/RPG with good storytelling and had, instead, delivered Dollhouse Dressup Supreme.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Originally Posted by Liz

Actually, is it even legal to dislike a movie that stars David Bowie?

But they portray Bowie as an evil goblin king and not as the genius god among men that he is.
The lady sueing drive was also claiming it was anti-semitic because it had a jewish character who was evil so I think we have a case.

[Sifright]

Originally Posted by Loyal

I can't say I've ever had that kind of disposable income and I still find it remarkably easy to say. Unless you actively avoid all promotional material, all previews, all reviews, and buy it the very minute it becomes available, there's little reason not to be reasonably well-informed of your purchase. There's something to be said about avoiding spoilers, but come on. In this day and age?

The last twenty years have given me little reason to expect a given game will be exactly as developers have claimed it will be. Dunno why I'd expect different now.

You understand that I do not consider lying about the last ten minutes of the game sufficient grounds to invalidate the entertainment value of the remaining however many hours of gameplay, which, from my impressions reading around, seem to be fairly solid overall? That I therefore consider the idea of receiving a full refund on these grounds is ridiculous?

These claims are what I'd expect if a developer had promised some spectacular, innovative Shooter/RPG with good storytelling and had, instead, delivered Dollhouse Dressup Supreme.

So what you are saying is that the scale of the fraud doesn't justify a refund?

[Satan's Onion]

Okay, this thread has has about eighty-two pages (by my pagination) for all of y'all to clearly hash out your arguments, which is more than enough internet words for you to have effectively driven your respective positions well into the Earth's molten inner core. Therefore we're gonna shut this baby down before it slips past the Derp Event Horizon into an all-consuming black hole of idiocy.

Originally Posted by Liz

Actually, is it even legal to dislike a movie that stars David Bowie?

Technically. But dammit, it shouldn't be.