this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
-1 points (0.0% liked)

Games

16406 readers
1768 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

That’s an interesting phrase, “getting account linking took a Herculean effort”, so they had ulterior motives in what they were doing? Thats a bad look.

Edit

Arrowhead knew exactly what they were doing with the lack of communication and with everything else they’ve done. This was planned.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

IDK, I read this more as they intentionally sabotaged Sony's bullshit up front hoping for an eventual user revolt. I think he knows that this kind of bullshit would potentially overshadow the game itself and turn a lot of people off from what is legitimately a great game.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

So it sounds like you’re defending a company for taking money and agreeing to contract obligations and then completely turning around and using the public to fight their battle? Instead of doing it the right way and either not agreeing to them or coming to other terms?

Thats what you’re doing here? Defending one corporations greed while decrying another? You’re a hypocrite lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like it was poorly phrased and they meant dealing with the repercussions of account linking took a massive effort.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

That’s the thing though, what effort?

It was part of their contract from day 1, they did as little as possible to deal with it from their end when their servers went down and Sony let them pause it.

The splash screen should have provided more details about the mandatory requirements, they knew what they were doing by being vague and not upfront about anything.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I am not sure why you are getting downvoted.

The dude may have wonderful motives of not wanting the account linking and decides on his own against it to make the game more available. However he also knew it is not going to fly, so its not very difficult to imagine what will happen. I don't see this guy being on the right side here.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Because people hate discussion and anyone who points out their own lack of education is somehow a shill and defending a corporation.

Which is hilarious since every single one is defending another corp, while also not admitting they couldn’t read multiple warnings before buying the game.

In other words, people’s feelings were hurt by the truth, and they are taking it out on me. I don’t give two shits about downvotes, and it’s incredibly amusing all the shit people come up with when pointed out.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think they meant getting the account linking stuff undone/reversed took a Herculean effort. Guess Sony really wanted it

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

It was part of their contract, of course they are going to want the company they gave funding to make their game hold up their end of the bargain. Or are you suggesting it’s okay for people to just say fuck contracts and do what they want? That can’t be your point here is it?

So why would they go out of their way to undo/reverse something they agreed upon to do in the first place. They saw dollar bills after Sony let them pause it and have now essentially admitted it. And not surprisingly, people are coming out in droves to defend them.

This is going to backfire on arrowhead spectacularly in the future. It’ll take time, but they’ve fucked up royally in the end here.

This is basically no different than what CDPR did, but this is a Sony funded game so they can’t just pull the game.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I would absolutely love to see small studios taking Sony's money, making a great game, and then using that as leverage to undermine dumb "platform engagement" bullshit which adds zero value to the game. Sony has been cancer to the gaming industry for a long time now, and I give less than zero fucks about whatever kind of metastisized bullshit they had planned here.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

Ah so one corporation being greedy is perfectly acceptable, but not for another?

Sure that’s not hypocritical at all….

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Illegal contract terms have never been enforceable.

My employment contract has a non-compete clause for the express purpose of trying to depress my wages. Fortunately I can break that shitty term with impunity.

One sided contracts requiring anti-consumer behavior should be illegal too, but until then I support any way of getting out of the offensive clauses.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

What was illegal about it?

It hurting your feelings doesn’t make something illegal. They agreed to terms, sucks to be them if they didn’t like it.

And even if it was illegal, getting the public to fight your battle for you is just about the shittiest thing you can do. Don’t agree to the fucking terms in the first place lmfao, or at least educate yourself before agreeing. This is wholly on arrowhead, but defend one corporation while decrying another lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Imposing post-sale requirements on your customers like this PSN rug pull should be illegal.

Bravo for anyone thwarting such bullshit.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Post sale…? What are you talking about?

As explained in the first comment, arrowhead knew about this requirement from the start, it was mandatory until their servers couldn’t handle the load. Sony paused the requirement and sent their engineers out for free to deal with it. It was listed on their store page, and they had a very vague splash screen the first time you loaded the game. The splash screen should have mentioned the mandatory requirement, they knew what they were doing when they omitted that part….

They are biting the hand that feeds them, and the public is defending their greed lmfao.

Did you not read the game requirements before purchasing? The amount of people making uneducated purchases on this game is sadly way too high, is that why people are adamant about defending this? So they don’t look bad for not reading multiple warnings…?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

When the PSN linkage shit the bed on release they made it optional even though text listed it as required. They also sold it in countries that don't have PSN, furthering the fact that it was optional in practice.

Changing back to the original plan is still imposing a requirement well after release even if they said it was required.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yeah so that’s exactly where arrowhead fucked up… isn’t it…? They should have been far more upfront to begin with, but they weren’t and have now thrown Sony under the bus. They knew exactly what they were doing while they had dollar signs in their eyes., but sure defend them….

Maybe they shouldn’t have made the issue out to be nothing? Where is their personal responsibility for what they created with this fiasco? They made the splash screen to explain the issue, they didn’t provide the required info did they? Or is it somehow Sonys fault for their splash screen….?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sony fanboys are a different breed man.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago

Why does everyone resort to shill/fanboy when someone points out something? Arrowhead ignored contract terms, how am I fanboy for pointing that out, but no one else is a shill for actively defending a corporation ignoring contract terms and bullying other corporations to get their way?

You can decry Sony for doing it than defend someone else, that’s hypocrisy and everyone is doing it here.

So, sure I’m a fanboy because I’m pointing out how arrowhead fucked up? Sure lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Anybody ever notice how people like this chap here always seem so...angry in their replies? They'll go all in on insulting you somehow and cry if you respond in kind.

Like...tf?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Where is the anger and where is the insulting?

Why are you lying instead of addressing the main point? People always resort to fallacy’s when their point is made out to be irrelevant. It seems you don’t have anything actually to add here…?

So.. what are you going on about here? I’m curious why you think people will believe your obvious lies? Sure yeah you can be mad at me for pointing out the obvious that people painfully missed, but that doesn’t make me angry or insulting lmfao.

So what was illegal about it? Or are you not going to address any points and just whine…?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My dude, that's not even the same user. Get a grip.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

So…. because they aren’t the same user they can ignore the discussion that’s already happening and scream whatever they want! And I can’t defend my own points…?

Does that make any sense lol?

What’s wrong with asking them to address what the discussion is about and what’s wrong with pointing out they aren’t adding to conversation…?

Or is this just a circle jerk thread that I waltz into? Do people really detest conversations? Because that’s what I’m trying to have here, but apparently everyone just wants wants to defend arrowheads shitty way of handling contract disputes.

What was illegal about Sony enforcing their contract? Please explain instead of going off on an irrelevant tangent, can anyone answer? Or are people just going to shout without backing anything up? If someone wants to claim something’a illegal, they should be able to at least explain when asked, but I’m the asshole for asking…? Sure lmfao how does that make any sense?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Was user linkage part of their contract? I haven't seen it. Have you?

If it was, I doubt such a clause is illegal, as you say.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, they have admitted it a hundred times.

Arrowhead knows exactly what they were doing with the lack of communication and are now railroading steam and Sony.

The retailer holds responsibility for selling it in non-sellable markets. Steam knew of Sonys account requirements, it was part of the store page, so why would Steam allow sales in those markets? They have at least addressed that issue on their end now, but there’s still a lot to shake down from this.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

For all we know, Arrowhead paid to rent Sony moderation infrastructure month-to-month six months in advance and didn't have it as part of their publishing contract and had to cancel the month and ask for a refund.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

For all we know…? We know it was part of their contract for months before release lol. What else do you need to know here? And why are you trying to move the goalposts now that I answered you question irrevocably?