surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Knew you wouldn't pass this up. This is why I don't buy new games the day they come out anymore. And fuck DLC and Online passes, apparently a full game is $80 now.
There was no news on the PS3-exclusive content after E3. I was wondering about what happened to it. Hopefully THQ can release some free DLC or something to make up for it.
Lovely. Stay classy publishers!
People complain way too much about online passes and not enough about retailer exclusive dlc btw.
People complain way too much about online passes and not enough about retailer exclusive dlc btw.
is it just me or has this been happening way too much lately? seems like a lot of publishers are saying one thing then turning around and just saying "F*** it"
I feel like this may be something to do with that whole thing about MS not allowing games with additional content on the disc on other platforms (the PS3) to be released on 360.
Ea backing out on the copy of 1943,and now this makes me wonder if thats true...
Ea backing out on the copy of 1943,and now this makes me wonder if thats true...
"I am certain there are supposed to be laws against this kind of false advertising. Surely you can't just promise something to paying customers, then silently refuse to give it to them once the transaction is made, right?"
SHHHH! You are not supposed to talk about this! EA will now hunt you down dude.
SHHHH! You are not supposed to talk about this! EA will now hunt you down dude.
And just like the EA BF3 incident, this is exactly the kind of thing that should be brought to state attorney generals by people who purchased the game. These are exactly the kinds of deceptive actions that attorney generals get paid to investigate, and bring class action lawsuits to prevent from happening in the future.
This isn't the kind of thing that resolves itself. It takes consumers going to their attorney general, and demanding something be done, for anything to actually be done. Similar kinds of class action suits are brought to court by state attorney generals on the near constant, but it takes consumers to actually step up and say something. I know that taking an interest in yourself and others takes a backseat to "ZOMG I jus play gaems" for a lot of gamers, but allowing shit like this to continue when we could be doing something about it makes us all look like the world's most brain dead consumers.
This isn't the kind of thing that resolves itself. It takes consumers going to their attorney general, and demanding something be done, for anything to actually be done. Similar kinds of class action suits are brought to court by state attorney generals on the near constant, but it takes consumers to actually step up and say something. I know that taking an interest in yourself and others takes a backseat to "ZOMG I jus play gaems" for a lot of gamers, but allowing shit like this to continue when we could be doing something about it makes us all look like the world's most brain dead consumers.
....... all I hear when publishers pull crap like this is "please please please if you buy our game, buy it used!". Stay classy dev/pubs, stay classy.....
The moral of the story is if you say something ..... follow through or accept the consequences ..... then blame piracy (the defacto answer to any issue that crops up)
The moral of the story is if you say something ..... follow through or accept the consequences ..... then blame piracy (the defacto answer to any issue that crops up)
In the UK and Canada there are laws call the "sales of goods act" that have a section stating that a product sold with a certain description much match the product
Here's a portion of the Ontario one in cases when the description doesn't match the product.
"Where the seller delivers to the buyer the goods contracted to be sold mixed with goods of a different description not included in the contract, the buyer may accept the goods that are in accordance with the contract and reject the rest, or may reject the whole."
So I'm pretty sure people are within their right to demand a refund. I don't know what laws are in the US but I'm sure there are similar laws.
As for lawsuits, I don't know if it would work.
It is also factually "false advertising" as the company claimed the product will include/function/look a way when that is in fact false and it doesn't.
This would again give you the right to demand a refund, and possibly leading to law suits if people complain to their countries government arm that deals with fraudulent advertising.
Since this is the Internet, it's easy to get proof of this.
The problem with this and why these companies get away with it, is no one does anything about it. They brace for anal impact and believe that they can't do anything when they can.
God damn it, consumer rights need to be taught in schools.
Here's a portion of the Ontario one in cases when the description doesn't match the product.
"Where the seller delivers to the buyer the goods contracted to be sold mixed with goods of a different description not included in the contract, the buyer may accept the goods that are in accordance with the contract and reject the rest, or may reject the whole."
So I'm pretty sure people are within their right to demand a refund. I don't know what laws are in the US but I'm sure there are similar laws.
As for lawsuits, I don't know if it would work.
It is also factually "false advertising" as the company claimed the product will include/function/look a way when that is in fact false and it doesn't.
This would again give you the right to demand a refund, and possibly leading to law suits if people complain to their countries government arm that deals with fraudulent advertising.
Since this is the Internet, it's easy to get proof of this.
The problem with this and why these companies get away with it, is no one does anything about it. They brace for anal impact and believe that they can't do anything when they can.
God damn it, consumer rights need to be taught in schools.
Ya know, I typically try to avoid getting pissed about silly game shit, but this one actually irks me. In fact as a PS3 gamer, it irks me enough to skip the game. Sucks because Max Scoville actually had me sold on this but this shit is going too far. Pass.
It's called bait and switch, it is illegal, but the only reasonable thing people can do is get a refund.
I will also use this as yet another example as to why I advocate buying used or discount bin over new, or, as some of the larger idiots seem to enjoy doing, pre-ordering.
I will also use this as yet another example as to why I advocate buying used or discount bin over new, or, as some of the larger idiots seem to enjoy doing, pre-ordering.
"God damn it, consumer rights need to be taught in schools."
But if governments and corporations allow u to have power how can they possibly keep screwing you over time and again? Your logic is flawed Mr Hardy.
But if governments and corporations allow u to have power how can they possibly keep screwing you over time and again? Your logic is flawed Mr Hardy.
Because every other company is perfectly honest with it's advertising?
This happens all the time, it's not false advertising, I never saw a single advertisement at all regarding it. One statement at E3 does not constitute a promise at all. If that were true, what of all the canceled games/projects/DLC announced at E3 over the years that never came out? Is that also now false advertisement since they announced a release date and it never hit?
Are people really going to boycott a game because they're not getting their likely half assed 'hit stuff with a dildo bat' mode that THQ was going to offer you for free anyway? You all act like you're missing half the campaign or something.
Hell, maybe they just had to take it out for a completely valid reason and don't want to comment on it just yet. Could be any number of things, but people assume the worst and bitch about it to no end like that will change anything.
If you purchase the game and completely ignored the lack of 'PS3 exclusive content' marker that, oh, every PS3 game with exclusive content has then you have no right to bitch about getting ripped off. It's your own fault, so shut up.
This happens all the time, it's not false advertising, I never saw a single advertisement at all regarding it. One statement at E3 does not constitute a promise at all. If that were true, what of all the canceled games/projects/DLC announced at E3 over the years that never came out? Is that also now false advertisement since they announced a release date and it never hit?
Are people really going to boycott a game because they're not getting their likely half assed 'hit stuff with a dildo bat' mode that THQ was going to offer you for free anyway? You all act like you're missing half the campaign or something.
Hell, maybe they just had to take it out for a completely valid reason and don't want to comment on it just yet. Could be any number of things, but people assume the worst and bitch about it to no end like that will change anything.
If you purchase the game and completely ignored the lack of 'PS3 exclusive content' marker that, oh, every PS3 game with exclusive content has then you have no right to bitch about getting ripped off. It's your own fault, so shut up.
No skin off my nose. I already got burned buying it new, shame to see THQ be dicks.
What a shambling disappointment of a game.
What a shambling disappointment of a game.
Renegade panda: defender of multimillion dollar corporations everywhere! They can do no wrong! They aren't shady or unethical, its just everyone ELSE that's stupid!
Those poor, defenseless, destitute publishers... :-( Keep fighting the good fight panda!
Those poor, defenseless, destitute publishers... :-( Keep fighting the good fight panda!
With Microsoft's new rules they likely can't. Didn't Microsoft come out with that stupid policy that any game that featured additional content for an alternate platform wouldn't be allowed?
I wonder how much longer devs will tolerate that type of abusive business practice.
I wonder how much longer devs will tolerate that type of abusive business practice.
@RenegadePanda
We don't have the right to complain about it? We were told that there would be content that wasn't there. No one ever retracted the statement made at E3. They made a promise they didn't keep. That's reason to be pissed.
We don't have the right to complain about it? We were told that there would be content that wasn't there. No one ever retracted the statement made at E3. They made a promise they didn't keep. That's reason to be pissed.
" If that were true, what of all the canceled games/projects/DLC announced at E3 over the years that never came out? Is that also now false advertisement since they announced a release date and it never hit?"
Also, I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you don't know what the word cancelled means. When you announce something then cancel it, its okay, because you let people know by CANCELLING it. When u announce something, don't cancel it, then release it not the way you said it was going to be, you are lying to people.
The difference is subtle, I know.
Also, I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you don't know what the word cancelled means. When you announce something then cancel it, its okay, because you let people know by CANCELLING it. When u announce something, don't cancel it, then release it not the way you said it was going to be, you are lying to people.
The difference is subtle, I know.
Meh...wasn't going to buy GTA's redheaded stepchild anyways...but the whole renegging on promised exclusivity is busch. Don't promise what you won't deliver.
Speaking of promised exclusivity that's a big fat lie...have we heard anything from Rockstar concerning AGENT??
Yeah...didn't think so.
Speaking of promised exclusivity that's a big fat lie...have we heard anything from Rockstar concerning AGENT??
Yeah...didn't think so.
This shouldn't come as too much of a surprise. After all, this is a game that revomed the bulk of the online multiplayer from Saints Row 2 and then slapped an Online Pass on what was left.
Clearly THQ isn't in a giving mood right now.
Clearly THQ isn't in a giving mood right now.
Unless I misread things, microsofts policy is they wont publish a game on their system that was already published by another competing company. It has to do with indy games most likely. Which is the reason you will see iOS games on the wii and ps3 and not on xbox.
Basically, if an indy developer gets its game on psn, and it's published by Sony first, Microsoft wont touch it. Won't put it on the system, and won't publish it for their systems.
This should't matter when it comes to a game published by a 3rd party though.
Basically, if an indy developer gets its game on psn, and it's published by Sony first, Microsoft wont touch it. Won't put it on the system, and won't publish it for their systems.
This should't matter when it comes to a game published by a 3rd party though.
@tekbunny
Not every canceled game got canceled, several of them, like Duke Nukem Forever, never had anything said. They just dropped off the radar despite having multiple release dates, trailers and 'promises' at E3's. So what about those?
Use your head once and awhile and read into things.
I'm not 'defending' anything either, I'm pointing out obvious facts that everyone else is too pissed off to realize. Stop acting like one statement at an E3 event entitles you to something. How many things have been said at gaming events that never came to be? Yet it's only when it affects a large group that anyone bothers to care.
You're all just looking for reasons to bitch, and yet again, I bet at least half of those complaining had no idea or didn't give a shit about this extra content to begin with. It's just cool to hate on big name publishers that aren't Steam, because Steam does nothing wrong ever.
Not every canceled game got canceled, several of them, like Duke Nukem Forever, never had anything said. They just dropped off the radar despite having multiple release dates, trailers and 'promises' at E3's. So what about those?
Use your head once and awhile and read into things.
I'm not 'defending' anything either, I'm pointing out obvious facts that everyone else is too pissed off to realize. Stop acting like one statement at an E3 event entitles you to something. How many things have been said at gaming events that never came to be? Yet it's only when it affects a large group that anyone bothers to care.
You're all just looking for reasons to bitch, and yet again, I bet at least half of those complaining had no idea or didn't give a shit about this extra content to begin with. It's just cool to hate on big name publishers that aren't Steam, because Steam does nothing wrong ever.
@Your comparison of this to never released six is completely irrelevant. No one paid for the DLC since it was never released.
This is a case of content that was said to be *included* in the admissions price of the game. People aren't upset because they didn't release DLC that could be purchased later; they are upset because something that was supposed to come with the game didn't. Regardless of your opinion of the content, telling an audience in a public forum that they will get 10 things when they buy something, but they only get 9 when the times comes gives any and everyone the right to complain.
This is a case of content that was said to be *included* in the admissions price of the game. People aren't upset because they didn't release DLC that could be purchased later; they are upset because something that was supposed to come with the game didn't. Regardless of your opinion of the content, telling an audience in a public forum that they will get 10 things when they buy something, but they only get 9 when the times comes gives any and everyone the right to complain.
@RenegadePanda
Whether or not the nature of advertising in general is one that fosters transparency and honesty isn't being debated here. Broadening the scope of an argument as a means of invalidating it is ridiculous.
And, besides this, you're wrong. Features not making the cut are not the same as being promised additional content only to have it removed from the final product without notice.
When EA did this, they admitted to knowing the promised content would not be in the final product more than a month before its release, and simply did not bother to tell anyone. They withheld pertinent information they assumed could harm sales because they assumed it could hard sales. While I don't think this is false advertising under the way the law is written, it is most certainly deceptive advertising, admitted and flagrant.
But it is typical for the consumer to be blamed in situations like this. At the end of the day, consumers were given purchase influencing information before release of a product, and not only was that information wrong, the correct information was kept from them. Square-dance in semantics until your feet bleed, the basic issue remains as simple as that. Until you can give reason as to why information meant to influence purchase should be allowed to be false, with the correct information being intentionally withheld, then you are without a leg to stand on.
Whether or not the nature of advertising in general is one that fosters transparency and honesty isn't being debated here. Broadening the scope of an argument as a means of invalidating it is ridiculous.
And, besides this, you're wrong. Features not making the cut are not the same as being promised additional content only to have it removed from the final product without notice.
When EA did this, they admitted to knowing the promised content would not be in the final product more than a month before its release, and simply did not bother to tell anyone. They withheld pertinent information they assumed could harm sales because they assumed it could hard sales. While I don't think this is false advertising under the way the law is written, it is most certainly deceptive advertising, admitted and flagrant.
But it is typical for the consumer to be blamed in situations like this. At the end of the day, consumers were given purchase influencing information before release of a product, and not only was that information wrong, the correct information was kept from them. Square-dance in semantics until your feet bleed, the basic issue remains as simple as that. Until you can give reason as to why information meant to influence purchase should be allowed to be false, with the correct information being intentionally withheld, then you are without a leg to stand on.
@RenegadePanda - No, we're just missing half the campaign because it was pulled out and converted into pre-planned DLC.
Phone typos galore.
@Renegade - Your comparison of this to never released DLC is completely irrelevant. No one paid for that DLC since it was never released.
This is a case of content that was said to be *included* in the admissions price of the game. People aren't upset because they didn't release DLC that could be purchased later; they are upset because something that was supposed to come with the game didn't. Regardless of your opinion of the content, telling an audience in a public forum that they will get 10 things when they buy something, but they only get 9 when the times comes gives any and everyone the right to complain.
@Renegade - Your comparison of this to never released DLC is completely irrelevant. No one paid for that DLC since it was never released.
This is a case of content that was said to be *included* in the admissions price of the game. People aren't upset because they didn't release DLC that could be purchased later; they are upset because something that was supposed to come with the game didn't. Regardless of your opinion of the content, telling an audience in a public forum that they will get 10 things when they buy something, but they only get 9 when the times comes gives any and everyone the right to complain.
What I was getting at, is that this is just a cost cutting measure. Companies like this realize they might piss off the vocal minority, but that wont stop a game like this from making huge bank, since it seems most people don't really care when it comes to money being spent these days... especially on videogames.
@renegade panda
Oh, this is going to be embarrassing for you but they actually released Duke nukem.
also, steam isn't a pub or dev, its a digital distribution service. So you fail on that front too. But feel free to preach what current wrongdoings they have going on, I'm all ears.
Long story short, there's a difference between being honest and not, and if you choose to side with people who are dishonest, then by all means, spout off whatever psychotic crap you want. Just don't expect for all of us to not shut u down.
Oh, this is going to be embarrassing for you but they actually released Duke nukem.
also, steam isn't a pub or dev, its a digital distribution service. So you fail on that front too. But feel free to preach what current wrongdoings they have going on, I'm all ears.
Long story short, there's a difference between being honest and not, and if you choose to side with people who are dishonest, then by all means, spout off whatever psychotic crap you want. Just don't expect for all of us to not shut u down.
Shit I meant Valve.
Mistypes aside, I'm speaking of DNF through the years, not the recent release 14 years after it's announcement.
Mistypes aside, I'm speaking of DNF through the years, not the recent release 14 years after it's announcement.
Oh hell, trying to respond to anything on this stupid Mac is proving difficult.
Whatever, think what you want people. I'm done dealing with this computer taking 5 minutes to reload a web page while simultaneously doing work and making stupid typos because of it.
Whatever, think what you want people. I'm done dealing with this computer taking 5 minutes to reload a web page while simultaneously doing work and making stupid typos because of it.
Kk, bug bye panda. until next time a helpless company needs your defense from us scathing, screwed-over customers.
I also just saw that Saints Row: The Third has two pieces of launch DLC as well as the season's pass on steam.
One of the pieces of DLC is cheats. You know, those things that have been included with games since the original NES? 3 bucks now. Awesome.
One of the pieces of DLC is cheats. You know, those things that have been included with games since the original NES? 3 bucks now. Awesome.
RenegadePanda is mostly right. It is NOT a case of false advertisement unless the promise of a PS3 exclusive appeared on the box, on the web-page selling the game, or in an actual advertisement for the game. Announcing something at a convention before the product is released for sale is not an advertisement. It falls fully under the "details subject to change" category.
Obviously, they should make SURE they can do something before they mention it, but they are not obligated to be letter perfect at that stage.
This is probably a case of them wanting to do something, having the agreement laid out in principle, then discovering that they cannot follow through for one reason or another. Your guess is as good as mine in that regard.
This would be a great place for someone in the gaming press to dig deeper, talk to some contacts, and find out what happened. Good luck with that, I guess.
Obviously, they should make SURE they can do something before they mention it, but they are not obligated to be letter perfect at that stage.
This is probably a case of them wanting to do something, having the agreement laid out in principle, then discovering that they cannot follow through for one reason or another. Your guess is as good as mine in that regard.
This would be a great place for someone in the gaming press to dig deeper, talk to some contacts, and find out what happened. Good luck with that, I guess.
I am really angry at microsofts rule
no bf 1943
no exclusive saints row the third content
I am assuming tomorrow we will hear that the original assassins creed won't be in revelations
but microsoft will probably have exclusive episodes for gta 5 and sony won't be able to do anything about it.
no bf 1943
no exclusive saints row the third content
I am assuming tomorrow we will hear that the original assassins creed won't be in revelations
but microsoft will probably have exclusive episodes for gta 5 and sony won't be able to do anything about it.
How'd I miss this? I didn't even know there was supposed to be PS3-exclusive content. Maybe I should get pissed at THQ, but it's kind of hard when the fucking UPS guy still hasn't delivered my copy!!!
Looking at things, it seems that it was Sony who said Saints Row: The Third would have special stuff in it, and not THQ.
Still, that's a fucking dick move there, whether or not THQ announced it.
10 bucks says they took it out because they didn't want to deal with Fox News.
Still, that's a fucking dick move there, whether or not THQ announced it.
10 bucks says they took it out because they didn't want to deal with Fox News.
Also, I have a hard time caring about some piece of meaningless exclusive content. Did anyone really buy this game based on a nebulous tease made several months ago?
follow
