Gearbox Fights Back In Aliens Lawsuit

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
There is an update in the lawsuit over the false advertising claims made against Gearbox.

In the motion for partial summary judgment, filed with the Northern District of California court on Wednesday, attorneys for the developer argue that Gearbox shouldn't be included in the suit because it was a contractor and that Sega had final say on the game and its marketing. The filing also noted that Gearbox sunk millions of its own money into Aliens to finish the game.
Click to expand...
 
that site is a mess

if content providers want my eyes they need to lighten up on the scripts, 1 for text, 3 for vid, that is my limit...sorry
 
Anyone else notice the key word they should have left out "Gearbox is a video game software developer. It was neither the publisher nor seller of the video game at issue."?

Yep "Developer", they developed this turd, they also developed the rolling demo's that wowed everyone, so all the more reason they are at fault.

I truly dread to think what we will see when (or if) we see the Homeworld series reboot.
 
Outamyhead said:
Anyone else notice the key word they should have left out "Gearbox is a video game software developer. It was neither the publisher nor seller of the video game at issue."?

Yep "Developer", they developed this turd, they also developed the rolling demo's that wowed everyone, so all the more reason they are at fault.

I truly dread to think what we will see when (or if) we see the Homeworld series reboot.
Click to expand...
That's not entirely fair; Check Six Games developed the game. Gearbox had part in it for sure, particular towards the end, and deserve to be crucified. But if there's one thing I have learned from this, it's to not ever buy Check Six Games again. Gearbox also made Borderlands 1/2 both which I love so eh.
 
After all the countless hours of enjoyment Ive got out of the 2 Borderlands games, I gotta cut Gearbox a little slack. Maybe its because of that slack that I can see Gearbox's point. They just made the game. Sega was the one that marketed it and handled advertising and promotion. The only snag that I keep hanging up on is, who made the demo? If Gearbox made the demo that was so much better and not a real representation of the actual retail product then I have a hard time saying theyre innocent.
 
I think to those who think they should give them slack should remember all the promo videos they had of the game. Remember all the quotes of "we did this to make it spectacular", we did that blah blah blah. So every video I saw they never mentioned another 3rd party company working on this turd, just them saying it was "them" who came up with this game.

So now they back out to say they really didn't have a hand in it is just ridiculous. I haven't supported them since, the same that Ubisoft is next in line for.
 
Developers are almost always heavily constrained by publishers, particularly with regards to what is promised. If a CEO or president decides he wants boobies in the game, and there's no practical or functional way to do so, it will happen anyway and it will be part of the marketing.

Not saying Randy Pitchford doesn't need a few dozen more kicks in the nuts, but he can only be a dipshit as far as the publisher will allow.
 
To those defending Gearbox:
So as long as their "boss" (Sega) let's them do it, it is ok? Sega is in the wrong too, but just because Sega did not stop them from doing it doesn't make it ok. All three companies involved here are liars and solidly anti-consumer.
 
ontariotl said:
I think to those who think they should give them slack should remember all the promo videos they had of the game. Remember all the quotes of "we did this to make it spectacular", we did that blah blah blah. So every video I saw they never mentioned another 3rd party company working on this turd, just them saying it was "them" who came up with this game.

So now they back out to say they really didn't have a hand in it is just ridiculous. I haven't supported them since, the same that Ubisoft is next in line for.
Click to expand...
That's a ridiculous position overall. They had a hand but they fucked that up, how hard is that to understand? Do you stop buying anything SEGA for the same reason?

I bought that damn aliens game at full price and it was not what I expected, shame on me for pre ordering, that really is the thing that has to fucking stop. This was a turd but it was enabled by pre orders, so that's what has to stop.
 
People tend to forget that Gearbox/Pitchford gave an extended "look" at the game, the infamous pre-rendered-not even in the game "demo". They had full knowledge of the quality and the marketing behind the game. And as such are just as responsible as Sega for the blatant false advertising regarding the product.
 
Jaer44 said:
People tend to forget that Gearbox/Pitchford gave an extended "look" at the game, the infamous pre-rendered-not even in the game "demo". They had full knowledge of the quality and the marketing behind the game. And as such are just as responsible as Sega for the blatant false advertising regarding the product.
Click to expand...

It has been a while since the original story broke, but didn't Gearbox take money from Sega for Aliens to fund development of BL2? If I recall, that was a major accusation against them when the ACM stuff hit the fan.

And for those defending Gearbox, watch this and try to defend Pitchford with a straight face:
http://youtu.be/pyebULYg_vc

He goes out of his way to state that what is being shown is actual game play and not renders.
 
lollerwaffle said:
That's a ridiculous position overall. They had a hand but they fucked that up, how hard is that to understand? Do you stop buying anything SEGA for the same reason?

I bought that damn aliens game at full price and it was not what I expected, shame on me for pre ordering, that really is the thing that has to fucking stop. This was a turd but it was enabled by pre orders, so that's what has to stop.
Click to expand...

Not ridiculous at all. SEGA hasn't really brought out anything else that interests me to open my wallet. It's my way of speaking up to make sure publishers or developers make due with their promises, not bait and switch like they did with ACM and more recently Watch Dogs. The only thing that speaks is money and they won't be getting mine, especially with a pre order. If more buyers did this, I'm sure shit like this wouldn't be happening.
 
Even the Sonic games wound up buggy with bad camera angles towards the end.
Sega gave the game to Gearbox then Gearbox parted it out to 2 different studios.
Sega rushed release.
There's plenty of blame to pass around.
 
contractors are not liable for what the publisher decides is good enough. usually they have little control over what is green lighted and acceptable.

sure did they likely make it worst? maybe. could it also be possible that without gear box is could of been an even bigger disaster? that is possible also.

the only one to blame is SEGA for allowing the product to be released at all.
 
While I don't defend SEGA as they are to blame as well. However SEGA did delay the games release, so they weren't that too in a hurry to release. You can only polish a turd so much.

The point I have is Gearbox can't just wash their hands clean of this debacle.
 
But who made the demo?
Unless SEGA made a false demo and rendered videos behind gearbox's back, gearbox partook in the false ad. as well.
 
Spidey329 said:
And for those defending Gearbox, watch this and try to defend Pitchford with a straight face:
http://youtu.be/pyebULYg_vc
Click to expand...
Where did he say the game would not change, and what exactly does "Work In Progress" mean? I'm not defending the guy, but it seems he was genuinely excited about the game at this point, and for good reason, it looked good and obviously had a lot of passionate people behind it. The story sucking, the poor gameplay/graphics and bugs galore are such a bummer, but it's understandable that he'd feel inclined to defend the final product. Either he feels it was "his baby" and feels protective about it and the team he was on, or he was payed a good chunk of money by marketing to try to not dump on it like everyone else.

The situation sucks big time, but it's a great example of why you shouldn't buy too much into the hype and pre-order games. Like the above poster said, that shit has GOT to stop. It'll help developers and publishers to know we will not tolerate a bait-and-switch. If their game sucks and does not meet pre-release hype, they get ZERO money!
 
lollerwaffle said:
That's not entirely fair; Check Six Games developed the game. Gearbox had part in it for sure, particular towards the end, and deserve to be crucified. But if there's one thing I have learned from this, it's to not ever buy Check Six Games again. Gearbox also made Borderlands 1/2 both which I love so eh.
Click to expand...

Then Gearbox didn't bother with quality tests of the product they were supposed to be developing, or kicking someone's arse at Check Six into shape. Look at Duke Nukem Forever, it was the same POS that was demo'd and I'm sure they got feedback from that experience.
 
ontariotl said:
While I don't defend SEGA as they are to blame as well. However SEGA did delay the games release, so they weren't that too in a hurry to release. You can only polish a turd so much.

The point I have is Gearbox can't just wash their hands clean of this debacle.
Click to expand...

First thing a guilty party does is try to dismiss claims/charges. I hope judge does not allow it and the plaintiffs win.
 
I've only started playing through ACM recently. I purchased via Steam sale last Christmas, and never got round to playing it. Paying only $5 softens the blow, but it's still astonishing how bad it is.

Sega's had the Alien license for over six years (across two developers), and have yet to score a win. I don't have a lot of hope for Alien:Isolation in spite of Creative Assembly's involvement.
 
Saturn_V said:
I've only started playing through ACM recently. I purchased via Steam sale last Christmas, and never got round to playing it. Paying only $5 softens the blow, but it's still astonishing how bad it is.

Sega's had the Alien license for over six years (across two developers), and have yet to score a win. I don't have a lot of hope for Alien:Isolation in spite of Creative Assembly's involvement.
Click to expand...

I remember SEGA licensing the Alien thing back in 2006, so more like 8 years. It was a two-game (shooter and an rpg) effort from the start. Sadly it went horribly wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top