Gearbox Responds To False Advertising Lawsuit

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Gearbox Software doesn't seem to pleased about that class action lawsuit claiming the company used false advertising when marketing Aliens: Colonial Marines. The crew at Kotaku received the following statement:

Attempting to wring a class action lawsuit out of a demonstration is beyond meritless. We continue to support the game, and will defend the rights of entertainers to share their works-in-progress without fear of frivolous litigation.
 
Pitchford and Friends said:
We continue to support the game, and will defend the rights of entertainers to share their works-in-progress without fear of frivolous litigation.

Here's the thing douche-bags, you were supposed to release a completed game. Not a work-in-progress.
 
Here's the thing douche-bags, you were supposed to release a completed game. Not a work-in-progress.

What?

That's his point; The footage they showed early on was a work-in-progress, the game you got was the completed game. They're different because things changed during the development cycle.

You can argue that that's not a good excuse if you want but he's very clearly saying that the preview material, not the game that got released, was the work-in-progress.
 
It doesn't look good when the rolling demo has better graphics, detailing, and less glitching, than the final product.
 
I've always despised the guy. I hate myself for giving him money for DNF but I had no choice since 3D Realms was no more :(

I had to have that Duke bust.
 
If the Demo is nothing like the game - don't release the demo. The whole point of a demo is to see what to expect from the game.
 
This is really only an issue due to the absolute lack of any consumer protection regarding software, games anyway. It's a little beyond BS that I can drop $60 on something, find out it's completely broken 5 minutes later, and have absolutely no way to do anything about it except get told to go fuck myself by the developer... oops I mean "artist".

If you buy a piece of hardware that happens to be running crappy software, you can still get your money back. So why can't I do that if I buy crap software?

Sure, I don't think that the demo needs to be a 100% representation of the final product. That's just silly. However when your final product is completely broken, it's a different story. Same goes for a game like sim city. Sure, you can file a chargeback with the CC company, and then in retaliation the publisher nukes everything else you bought, great.
 
Solution for you guys: don't EVER play a demo then you won't have to worry about the demo being different from the game.

Asshats suing people because they are sad that a demo is different from the game are going to be a very valid reason for demos to not be released anymore.
 
Trade show demos are almost always different than the actual finished product. This is a silly lawsuit. Sega should be the one to bring down the hammer on these guys, not class action lawyers.
 
If you would just wait for the user and professional reviews of the game, there'd be no issue.
 
Solution for you guys: don't EVER play a demo then you won't have to worry about the demo being different from the game.

Asshats suing people because they are sad that a demo is different from the game are going to be a very valid reason for demos to not be released anymore.

The issue is that the demo is almost always either worse or, at best, equal to the final product, as one would expect from a work-in-progress. In this case, the opposite is true. They basically showed us a bunch of cool stuff, and then stripped it all out and gave us mediocre shit.

Plus, it isn't as if any of us got to actually play that original "100% gameplay" demo in the first place.
 
Solution for you guys: don't EVER play a demo then you won't have to worry about the demo being different from the game.

Asshats suing people because they are sad that a demo is different from the game are going to be a very valid reason for demos to not be released anymore.

Very few games come with demos any more because theyre usually 60% cut-scenes and the first 30 mins they put in a demo is usually the best half of a game.

Most games work like Hollywood. They buy positive reviews and flood all possible advertising channels and hope they can drown out any negative reviews for the first few weeks (or until honest reviews get spread).
 
The issue is that the demo is almost always either worse or, at best, equal to the final product

How could the Demo be better then the game it's self? If it was then no one would buy the game, which is the reason the demo exists. :confused:
 
Whether this lawsuit is legitimate or not, Gearbox should take the fucking hint.
 
This is only a problem because crack heads keep pre ordering games, wait for reviews and then play the game. Also the other comment is probably true if there was no demo half these people might have still bought the game and would not complain at all.

I cant say I like gearbox my first experience with them was op4, but that time I really did blame them. They released and alright game and I really enjoyed the multiplayer. But after a year or 2 they released an update where they included a CTF mode where they clearly wanted to kill the main multiplayer. After that eventually they abandoned it because their plan didn't work and they wouldn't give valve back the source code and files so to this day op4 is half broken.
 
How could the Demo be better then the game it's self? If it was then no one would buy the game, which is the reason the demo exists. :confused:

The demo that is constantly mentioned was the demo they showed at a game show (pax, E3, one of them) where Pitchford narrated it. It was made *Specifically* for showing at the game show, not for the game. They later took a few elements from said demo, stripped them of the higher res textures, the physics, lighting, and parts of the levels themselves and so on, and inserted them into the game.

here's the video if you've forgotten:
http://youtu.be/xulEWbAyv3k
 
Solution for you guys: don't EVER play a demo then you won't have to worry about the demo being different from the game.

Asshats suing people because they are sad that a demo is different from the game are going to be a very valid reason for demos to not be released anymore.


Are you daft? No one played the demo; it was never distributed, it was only ever shown off as actual gameplay. Hence the false advertisement claim.


How could the Demo be better then the game it's self? If it was then no one would buy the game, which is the reason the demo exists. :confused:

Have you even seen the comparison? The demo is in every way, shape and form better than the actual sold game. It's absolutely ludicrous that they even had the nerve to sell the game in the state it was in when they released it.
 
So people are crying over a video that they saw? It wasn't even an actual demo that people played?

jfc, companies do this all the time.

I remember going to get a new commodore game and spending hours looking at the back of the box to see which one had the coolest graphics (because that clearly is the best way to judge a game). Then I remember getting it home and being so depressed because the graphics on the box weren't even from the c64, they were for the Amiga, or Atari or some other system I didn't have. I still played the shit out of those games.
 
If you would just wait for the user and professional reviews of the game, there'd be no issue.

You're kidding, right? Professional reviews just repeat what they're told by the publishers.

If you can't decide whether you like a game just looking at actual gameplay on youtube, you deserve to be lied by the media.
 
The companies only have themselves to blame when they keep showing "previews" and "demos" that they know don't remotely represent what the final game will be like. They are using fake "demos" to sell their product, so at what point does it go from showing a 'work in progress" to being a "bait and switch"?

But if buyers would stop preordering this stuff, we wouldn't have these problems either.
 
If the Demo is nothing like the game - don't release the demo. The whole point of a demo is to see what to expect from the game.

Besides the graphics not THAT much had changed. Core game was the same. Plus this could be said about ANY game just about. Go watch the two Bioshock Infinite game play demos then play the actual thing. Also, Infinite is MUCH worse than ACM.
 
You're kidding, right? Professional reviews just repeat what they're told by the publishers.

If you can't decide whether you like a game just looking at actual gameplay on youtube, you deserve to be lied by the media.

I think there are a few impartial online reviewers at Eurogamer.net at least. You can't lump them all into the shitbag.
 
People have too much money or more money than brains, that's the only reason this bullshit exists. Honestly, if you can't keep it in your pants and wait for two months after release to read some reviews, watch gameplay videos, and then grab it on sale for 50% off, you deserve to lose every bit of money the game company has screwed you. Half the time the games also get a proper patch too.
 
We should sue all fastfood places for not selling burgers of picture perfect photoshopped quality too..

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!
 
Yeah, why hold anyone accountable for telling the gosh darn truth. Let’s just empower all software makers to be total chronic and sociopathic liars about their product and be held to no higher standards. We should all just sit on our hands and all agree to passively be displeased with their nefarious deeds. Screw the consumer! Screw them I say! As long as good men stand idle, evil will prevail…

/sarcasm

In all honesty, I say this studio needs to be made an example of. It is utterly reprehensible for these snake oil sales men to get away with the crap they have been. I say false advertising is a truth these game makers should be held to consequences over. Pre rendered non game play scenes passed off as actually game play to a stripped down shell of a game sold off in DLC chunks. Is all the same.

Can I go to Wendys and get a cheese burger and have them charge me extra for all the toppings when the picture clearly shows all the trimmings and one price? Then I find out it’s just a bun with nothing in between unless I get the premium version of said cheeseburger?
Where does it end?
Time for an asteroid to his the miserable planet I think…
 
It doesn't look good when the rolling demo has better graphics, detailing, and less glitching, than the final product.

Star Wars: Old Republic was like this. The Beta, and previews, had good hi res graphics. But then the retail version had the high resolution option removed and instead medium was named high. But you could see the graphics switch for a split second when it went to cut scenes. So the graphics were actually in the game, you just couldn't get enable them.

It was one of the reasons I left the game after a couple months. It just looked like crap, and seeing the hi-res flash for a second all the time was just like a taunt.
 
The issue isn't that the pre-release demonstration was different than the actual game, it's more that there were so many changes and they were all much worse than in the demonstration.

I seem to remember hearing that they used that footage in the launch ads and labeled it as actual gameplay footage, if that's true gearbox should and probably will lose. I rarely feel bad for people that pre-order because it encourages this type of behavior but I don't think anyone should have been stuck paying full price for it. The lawyers would be the only real winners but if it makes some publishers think twice before pushing some half baked game out to try and recoup their investment then it will have served it's purpose.
 
Good luck defending this one Gearbox. Your own "fake" E3 demos which look like a totally different and vastly superior graphically , game will be your own downfall on this lawsuit.

Looking forward to me tiny but deserved refund from the result. No more Gearbox games for me unless its Borderlands.
 
I think there are a few impartial online reviewers at Eurogamer.net at least. You can't lump them all into the shitbag.

Fair enough. Digital Foundry is a notable exception. There is a guy at gametrailers, too.
 
Back
Top