Bethesda is embroiled in a new potentially billion-dollar lawsuit which could delay Microsoft's acquisition of ZeniMax

D

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,667
Bethesda faces broad class-action lawsuit over Fallout 4 DLC as Microsoft takeover looms
Bethesda Softworks and its parent firm, ZeniMax Media, are about to face some uncomfortable questions in a class-action lawsuit about how they treated the loyal fans of the 2015 hit game Fallout 4. And that’s an annoying problem, as Microsoft is getting ready to buy Bethesda Softworks in a $7.5 billion acquisition.

While ZeniMax’s founder was a lawyer — the recently deceased Robert Altman — and was known for being litigious (ask former Oculus chief technology officer John Carmack), attorneys in the class-action say that they are shocked at some of the legal mistakes that Bethesda has made in the case involving the downloadable content (DLC) for Fallout 4. It isn’t yet clear how much financial exposure the company has, but the attorneys suing it say it’s a lot of money. It’s not unreasonable to think it could be a billion-dollar-plus liability, the lawyers claim.
Click to expand...

A clarification there: Robert Altman was ZeniMax' co-founder, not sole founder. And he was basically a scumbag who stole the company from Bethesda's founder, Christopher Weaver. And his litigious and greedy nature while running ZeniMax / Bethesda is detailed here.

Continuing with another excerpt from the article:
Over time, the Season Pass description consistently stated gamers would “get the Fallout 4 Season Pass and get all Fallout 4 DLC for one S.P.E.C.I.A.L. price.” It hasn’t been revealed how many people bought the DLC based on that promise, but the lawyers believe it was in the millions of players. Bethesda increased the price of the Season Pass to $50 in March 2016.

But on June 11, 2017, Bethesda announced something called Creation Club. The company characterized Creation Club as “a collection of all-new content for both Fallout 4 and [The Elder Scrolls V:] Skyrim. It features new items, abilities, and gameplay created by Bethesda Games Studios and outside development partners including the best community creators. Creation Club content is fully curated and compatible with the main game and official add-ons.”

While it sounded like “mods,” or community-created modifications for the game, it was really DLC, mostly created by Bethesda itself, said Filippo Marchino and Thomas Gray, attorneys at the class-action law firm The X-Law Group. Players like Jacob Devine of California thought they were entitled to that DLC, based on the promises that Bethesda made in the past. He bought a Season Pass in April 2019 at a GameStop store.
Click to expand...

The lawsuit cites Bethesda's Fallout 4 season-pass advertising as stating:

“To reward our most loyal fans, this time we’ll be offering a Season Pass that will get you all of the Fallout 4 DLC we ever do for just $30. Since we’re still hard at work on the game, we don’t know what the actual DLC will be yet, but it will start coming early next year. Based on what we did for Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Skyrim, we know that it will be worth at least $40, and if we do more, you’ll get it all with the Season Pass.”

So, Bethesda initially promised that purchasers of the Fallout 4 season pass would get all DLC for the game for free. Then they betrayed that promise and made Fallout 4 season-pass purchasers have to pay more for a huge amount of Fallout 4's DLC.

Coincidentally, Bethesda did the same thing regarding Fallout '76, before switching Fallout '76's DLC to requiring micro-transactions at insane prices from Bethesda's paid-mods store. Could there be another lawsuit ready to go there? I don't recall whether Bethesda switched to the paid-mods MTX model for Fallout '76 before or after it launched. If was before, then they might be able to say they legitimately changed people's expectations ahead of their purchasing of the game. But if it was after, then it would likely be in the same boat as Fallout 4's paid-mods bait-and-switch and would be a good opening for another lawsuit against Bethesda.



Those are my most direct thoughts on the news article and the Bethesda-corruption it is about.

But I want to bring attention to the part of the article which says, "attorneys in the class-action say that they are shocked at some of the legal mistakes that Bethesda has made in the case involving the downloadable content (DLC) for Fallout 4".

I've expressed and emphasized in previous posts on various forums, and some on this one, that the software industry has essentially created an imaginary legal regime where they claim all kinds of powers which they don't actually legally have, and that what software publishers claim regarding your and their rights, most of all in their EULAs, is typically ignorable because they just make it up and rely on the power of intimidation through a false appearance of authority to cultivate the perceptions and behaviours they wish to have from their customers.

I've explained the phenomena of the mostly-fake legal regime software publishers (and many developers) have bought into like this:
The more that the law, or any sector, is confined to just those practising it, the more it succumbs to club mentality and becomes a sub-environment in which the participants develop and start conforming to scene conventions that they created themselves but which aren't actually official, legal, and authoritative - but they might speak as if they are and try to intimidate others with them and impose them on others. They also might come to believe their conventions are actual legal reality - and this is a widespread issue within the software industry.

Currently, publishers, and I think many industry lawyers, still feel very empowered and puffed-up by a sense that they have some exclusive access and are the club rules / that being in the club means that the rules are as they have been taught to interpret them or as they prefer to tell others they are. And that's something to keep in mind when listening to what they have to say.
Click to expand...

And, deservedly, they keep receiving severe smack-downs by courts around the world.

The legal team bringing this new class-action lawsuit against Bethesda say Bethesda's legal practices have been shocking in their flagrant non-legality. But there are equally 'shocking' practices to be found all over the gaming industry, which has built and conducted itself upon what I think is a legal house of cards. And they did it simply because they followed a monkey-see / monkey-do approach to earlier publishers, who themselves were rarely challenged on anything they did, no matter how unlawful and abusive it was.

Consequently, I think that the realm of software publisher pseudo-legal dogmas is ripe for the plundering. They've avoided lawsuits just because they haven't been examined by more skillful lawyers in other legal sectors who understand the law as it's meant and applied everywhere else better than the software industry has imagined and pretended it to be.


Additionally, even if a software industry knows that the law isn't what they're claiming it to be in EULAs or similar, the fact that their job is a hired advocate for their publisher employer means it's very likely to probably that they won't tell you the truth anyway, because that would be contrary to what their job is to do. A lawyer is not a legal truth-teller, but is an advocate for hire - which often means that they're a liar for hire, lying for the benefit of their employer.

And here's some research about that: UMass researcher finds most people lie in everyday conversation

Starting from the unfortunate perspective that most people are liars, then look at where the biggest and worst liars are concentrated in society: The Top 10 Jobs That Attract Psychopaths

The profession with the highest concentration of psychopaths (having no compunction about lying, especially when it profits oneself, to lie being a key trait of a psychopath) is that of a CEO. And the second most-populated-by-psychopaths profession is that of a Lawyer. So, in software industry pseudo-legal-speak, there are layers of maximum-intensity ruthless willingness to lie and deceive to get a desired outcome that benefits the publisher. And in ZeniMax / Bethesda's case, their CEO was a lawyer from the dirtiest pool of dirty-politics lawyers, and one which exemplified the greedy and selfish tendencies that give CEOs, lawyers, and big publishers their deservedly-bad reputations.

Media Personality and Journalist are also among the top 10 professions most-populated by psychopaths (AKA pathological and unrepentant liars) - I want to point that out while on the topic of who not to trust.


The lesson here is, from my perspective, don't just accept what a software industry lawyer claims the law is (maybe consider suing their employer, instead). They're usually either clueless themselves and spouting a nonsensical dogma and industry-bubble convention that doesn't actually register as real in the law and courts, or they're deliberately lying to protect their employers, their industry, their professional reputations, and their personal profits from their profession. A lawyer who makes a lot of money by writing EULAs isn't going to easily concede that what they're doing and have been doing is playing pretend with themselves and their employers - doing so would hurt their pride and their wallets when they stop being hired to write EULAs which are legally completely meaningless and irrelevant regarding software which you've purchased.
 
Last edited:
My concern here is not the lawsuit. My concern is the loss of the company and the culture that created the fantasy RPGs of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, and the nuclear apocalypse games of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 (and made the game Fallout: New Vegas possible). For myself, the acquisition by Microsoft is just as troubling as Bethesda's acquisition by ZeniMax. Microsoft does not have a good reputation of nurturing IP - they have a reputation of buying up companies, flogging the development talent by abusing them to churn out [some game], and then shuttering the smoldering remnants.

For myself, the trilogy of Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim and the trilogy of Fallout 3 / Fallout New Vegas / Fallout 4 are like books. I don't need the games to be rethought, to be revamped for multiplayer, to become more action oriented and competitive. I just need the new books to read (and concerning Fallout '76, I don't read books so that a group of strangers can show up to p00n me - not every game has to be multiplayer). Update the graphics, make the world bigger, add in some new abilities, and make it possible for me to have a bigger effect on the environment (I LOVED making settlements in Fallout 4), and I'm happy. And I'm really (really) afraid that Bethesda, and the worlds that they created, are all going to be lost. I was afraid that it was all lost with Fallout '76, a game that had no NPCs but had a guy named 'BOBZOT' in power armor running around shooting everyone who was lower level. And even after they introduced the new storyline and private servers I still haven't gathered up the heart to restart that game.

Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, (Fallout: New Vegas) and Fallout 4 were all financial successes. Do they need to change? Change doesn't hurt, but you shouldn't throw out the core gameplay. I think most fans would be happy with new books and new chapters. Another series that I've played a lot of is the Far Cry series, I've owned and played through every iteration of the game, and I don't see the need to make changes. I've played through Far Cry: New Dawn several times, and I might do it again if Far Cry 6 is delayed through summer. Is Far Cry a formula? Yes, but that's the point. If you don't want to play in that formula that's fine, but I get annoyed with the Redditors who ask for multi-player changes to a franchise that has sold over 60 million units. Not every game needs to be adapted to become a Fortnite where the last two players twitch-build a scrap-wood fort to the moon.

Morrowind and Fallout were like love letters to my younger, nerdy, D&D-addicted self. I don't want to lose them.
 
seanreisk said:
My concern here is not the lawsuit. My concern is the loss of the company and the culture that created the fantasy RPGs of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, and the nuclear apocalypse games of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 (and made the game Fallout: New Vegas possible). For myself, the acquisition by Microsoft is just as troubling as Bethesda's acquisition by ZeniMax. Microsoft does not have a good reputation of nurturing IP - they have a reputation of buying up companies, flogging the development talent by abusing them to churn out [some game], and then shuttering the smoldering remnants.

For myself, the trilogy of Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim and the trilogy of Fallout 3 / Fallout New Vegas / Fallout 4 are like books. I don't need the games to be rethought, to be revamped for multiplayer, to become more action oriented and competitive. I just need the new books to read (and concerning Fallout '76, I don't read books so that a group of strangers can show up to p00n me - not every game has to be multiplayer). Update the graphics, make the world bigger, add in some new abilities, and make it possible for me to have a bigger effect on the environment (I LOVED making settlements in Fallout 4), and I'm happy. And I'm really (really) afraid that Bethesda, and the worlds that they created, are all going to be lost. I was afraid that it was all lost with Fallout '76, a game that had no NPCs but had a guy named 'BOBZOT' in power armor running around shooting everyone who was lower level. And even after they introduced the new storyline and private servers I still haven't gathered up the heart to restart that game.

Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, (Fallout: New Vegas) and Fallout 4 were all financial successes. Do they need to change? Change doesn't hurt, but you shouldn't throw out the core gameplay. I think most fans would be happy with new books and new chapters. Another series that I've played a lot of is the Far Cry series, I've owned and played through every iteration of the game, and I don't see the need to make changes. I've played through Far Cry: New Dawn several times, and I might do it again if Far Cry 6 is delayed through summer. Is Far Cry a formula? Yes, but that's the point. If you don't want to play in that formula that's fine, but I get annoyed with the Redditors who ask for multi-player changes to a franchise that has sold over 60 million units. Not every game needs to be adapted to become a Fortnite where the last two players twitch-build a scrap-wood fort to the moon.

Morrowind and Fallout were like love letters to my younger, nerdy, D&D-addicted self. I don't want to lose them.
Click to expand...
Nothing of value would be lost.
 
seanreisk said:
My concern here is not the lawsuit. My concern is the loss of the company and the culture that created the fantasy RPGs of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, and the nuclear apocalypse games of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 (and made the game Fallout: New Vegas possible). For myself, the acquisition by Microsoft is just as troubling as Bethesda's acquisition by ZeniMax. Microsoft does not have a good reputation of nurturing IP - they have a reputation of buying up companies, flogging the development talent by abusing them to churn out [some game], and then shuttering the smoldering remnants.

For myself, the trilogy of Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim and the trilogy of Fallout 3 / Fallout New Vegas / Fallout 4 are like books. I don't need the games to be rethought, to be revamped for multiplayer, to become more action oriented and competitive. I just need the new books to read (and concerning Fallout '76, I don't read books so that a group of strangers can show up to p00n me - not every game has to be multiplayer). Update the graphics, make the world bigger, add in some new abilities, and make it possible for me to have a bigger effect on the environment (I LOVED making settlements in Fallout 4), and I'm happy. And I'm really (really) afraid that Bethesda, and the worlds that they created, are all going to be lost. I was afraid that it was all lost with Fallout '76, a game that had no NPCs but had a guy named 'BOBZOT' in power armor running around shooting everyone who was lower level. And even after they introduced the new storyline and private servers I still haven't gathered up the heart to restart that game.

Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, (Fallout: New Vegas) and Fallout 4 were all financial successes. Do they need to change? Change doesn't hurt, but you shouldn't throw out the core gameplay. I think most fans would be happy with new books and new chapters. Another series that I've played a lot of is the Far Cry series, I've owned and played through every iteration of the game, and I don't see the need to make changes. I've played through Far Cry: New Dawn several times, and I might do it again if Far Cry 6 is delayed through summer. Is Far Cry a formula? Yes, but that's the point. If you don't want to play in that formula that's fine, but I get annoyed with the Redditors who ask for multi-player changes to a franchise that has sold over 60 million units. Not every game needs to be adapted to become a Fortnite where the last two players twitch-build a scrap-wood fort to the moon.

Morrowind and Fallout were like love letters to my younger, nerdy, D&D-addicted self. I don't want to lose them.
Click to expand...

I'm not really worried.

They already make some bad games.
Fallout 76 sucks. I think it was a cool idea overall, but in the end it was just bad.

They already sold out their brand.
Elder Scrolls Online is just a generic MMO with an Elder Scrolls skin. It could have been amazing if they stuck true to the Elder Scrolls gameplay which would be hard to balance, but also something no other MMO has done before, but they didn't.

What would MS do Bethesda isn't already?
 
seanreisk said:
My concern here is not the lawsuit. My concern is the loss of the company and the culture that created the fantasy RPGs of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, and the nuclear apocalypse games of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 (and made the game Fallout: New Vegas possible). For myself, the acquisition by Microsoft is just as troubling as Bethesda's acquisition by ZeniMax. Microsoft does not have a good reputation of nurturing IP - they have a reputation of buying up companies, flogging the development talent by abusing them to churn out [some game], and then shuttering the smoldering remnants.

For myself, the trilogy of Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim and the trilogy of Fallout 3 / Fallout New Vegas / Fallout 4 are like books. I don't need the games to be rethought, to be revamped for multiplayer, to become more action oriented and competitive. I just need the new books to read (and concerning Fallout '76, I don't read books so that a group of strangers can show up to p00n me - not every game has to be multiplayer). Update the graphics, make the world bigger, add in some new abilities, and make it possible for me to have a bigger effect on the environment (I LOVED making settlements in Fallout 4), and I'm happy. And I'm really (really) afraid that Bethesda, and the worlds that they created, are all going to be lost. I was afraid that it was all lost with Fallout '76, a game that had no NPCs but had a guy named 'BOBZOT' in power armor running around shooting everyone who was lower level. And even after they introduced the new storyline and private servers I still haven't gathered up the heart to restart that game.

Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, (Fallout: New Vegas) and Fallout 4 were all financial successes. Do they need to change? Change doesn't hurt, but you shouldn't throw out the core gameplay. I think most fans would be happy with new books and new chapters. Another series that I've played a lot of is the Far Cry series, I've owned and played through every iteration of the game, and I don't see the need to make changes. I've played through Far Cry: New Dawn several times, and I might do it again if Far Cry 6 is delayed through summer. Is Far Cry a formula? Yes, but that's the point. If you don't want to play in that formula that's fine, but I get annoyed with the Redditors who ask for multi-player changes to a franchise that has sold over 60 million units. Not every game needs to be adapted to become a Fortnite where the last two players twitch-build a scrap-wood fort to the moon.

Morrowind and Fallout were like love letters to my younger, nerdy, D&D-addicted self. I don't want to lose them.
Click to expand...
Bethesda ruined TES, which peaked with Morrowind. They ruined Fallout, with New Vegas being the only worthwhile entry since Bethesda bought it from the shell of Interplay.

Zenimax is the scummiest of gaming corporation scum, eclipsed only in size by EA and Actibliz.

Let them rot. Especially Todd Howard.
 
One just needs to look to Rare to see what happens to Microsoft acquired studios. When was the last time you saw a AAA game from them that you actually wanted to play?
 
this poopy game on release stuff would never happen if people would quit buying known poo on launch day and then clowns would not have to sue them to get a $5 rebate on their next title...
 
It can't be worse than the shithole that Bethesda currently is.. go for it.

The good Bethesda games I already own. And iD isn't in safe hands anyway being owned by Bethesda, so fucking sell it.
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
this poopy game on release stuff would never happen if people would quit buying known poo on launch day and then clowns would not have to sue them to get a $5 rebate on their next title...
Click to expand...
So, approximately never, then.
 
'It just works!"

Greed will spoil everything it touches, every time.
 
The OP article says that the team bringing the case against Bethesda suspects ZeniMax is trying to sell the company quickly to offload its assets and leave Bethesda an empty husk that has nothing to pay-out, should it lose the case:

But Marchino is concerned that Bethesda will use the same tactics related to the class-action lawsuit, transferring its assets to another company or Microsoft, and then leaving another empty shell. That’s why Marchino has filed papers to seek more information, and if necessary, to block Microsoft’s $7.5 billion purchase of Bethesda.

“We have a very big concern. Because this class action we’re engaged in is a proverbial bet the company litigation, meaning that the value of a judgment could end up being greater than the assets,” Marchino said. “It’s curious to us that, all of a sudden, there is this rush to sell. It liquidates the company, and it prevents the millions of people that are members of the class from recovering money.”

During the case, the plaintiffs asked if Bethesda was amid an acquisition. Two months before the big deal was announced, they received an answer from Esquenet, the outside attorney for Bethesda.

She replied in a letter on July 10, 2019, saying, “With respect to the alleged sale of Bethesda, your letter is nothing but rank speculation and suspicion (apparently tracing back to some third-party report referencing unconfirmed ‘high-level, informal talks’), and the relief you seek is not grounded in reality and lacks merit. You have failed to provide any credible evidence of any impending sale or asset transfer, much less that anyone at Bethesda is allegedly plotting to commit fraud and/or dissipate assets to avoid some hypothetical, non-existent future judgment (which of course is not the case). Moreover, the discovery you are seeking is intrusive, irrelevant to any claims in the case, and is an attempt to harass Bethesda and its management.”

Marchino said it was odd that less than two months later, the acquisition agreement was announced.

Marchino added, “What we’re going to try and do is go in and ask a judge to stop the sale between Microsoft and Bethesda to preserve the assets. And it’s known as a motion for preliminary injunction.”
Click to expand...

The Fallout 4 DLC advertising which the lawsuit is based on is still present on Bethesda's website, here:

https://bethesda.net/en/article/2RAO5fYPkcUC0i8KMkyOS/fallout-4-launch-and-beyond

ut4DLCpromise.PNG.d26d436bb4e0485305063703200ebac1.png
 
seanreisk said:
My concern here is not the lawsuit. My concern is the loss of the company and the culture that created the fantasy RPGs of Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, and the nuclear apocalypse games of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 (and made the game Fallout: New Vegas possible). For myself, the acquisition by Microsoft is just as troubling as Bethesda's acquisition by ZeniMax. Microsoft does not have a good reputation of nurturing IP - they have a reputation of buying up companies, flogging the development talent by abusing them to churn out [some game], and then shuttering the smoldering remnants.

For myself, the trilogy of Morrowind / Oblivion / Skyrim and the trilogy of Fallout 3 / Fallout New Vegas / Fallout 4 are like books. I don't need the games to be rethought, to be revamped for multiplayer, to become more action oriented and competitive. I just need the new books to read (and concerning Fallout '76, I don't read books so that a group of strangers can show up to p00n me - not every game has to be multiplayer). Update the graphics, make the world bigger, add in some new abilities, and make it possible for me to have a bigger effect on the environment (I LOVED making settlements in Fallout 4), and I'm happy. And I'm really (really) afraid that Bethesda, and the worlds that they created, are all going to be lost. I was afraid that it was all lost with Fallout '76, a game that had no NPCs but had a guy named 'BOBZOT' in power armor running around shooting everyone who was lower level. And even after they introduced the new storyline and private servers I still haven't gathered up the heart to restart that game.

Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, (Fallout: New Vegas) and Fallout 4 were all financial successes. Do they need to change? Change doesn't hurt, but you shouldn't throw out the core gameplay. I think most fans would be happy with new books and new chapters. Another series that I've played a lot of is the Far Cry series, I've owned and played through every iteration of the game, and I don't see the need to make changes. I've played through Far Cry: New Dawn several times, and I might do it again if Far Cry 6 is delayed through summer. Is Far Cry a formula? Yes, but that's the point. If you don't want to play in that formula that's fine, but I get annoyed with the Redditors who ask for multi-player changes to a franchise that has sold over 60 million units. Not every game needs to be adapted to become a Fortnite where the last two players twitch-build a scrap-wood fort to the moon.

Morrowind and Fallout were like love letters to my younger, nerdy, D&D-addicted self. I don't want to lose them.
Click to expand...
I think that, unfortunately, the Bethesda which is responsible for those worlds and the lore they're based on is already long gone. Today's Bethesda didn't create The Elder Scrolls - the creator of the series left the company after being sidelined when it came to developing Morrowind (which I personally think is the last good TES). And the founder of Bethesda, who was passionate about the games that Bethesda made, was kicked out of his own company by Robert Altman, who was the sleazy lawyer who sued everybody, reportedly violently forced MTX into their games (Rage 2, Fallout 4, Fallout '76), didn't think that talent mattered when it comes to making games (an attitude which I think ironically shows very much in Bethesda's games), and reportedly never touched a game in his life.

Bethesda as it's been known for the past 15 years has been riding on the creations of other people and studios, and has been putting-out dwindling quality as they continue to step further away from the original concepts they inherited and dumb-down each new game even further from the previous one. Perhaps most of the strengths of Oblivion and Skyrim aren't from Bethesda's own talent, but are from the people who created TES, which today's Bethesda inherited the IP, lore, and game design of.

Fallout wasn't created by Bethesda, and I personally don't think any of the Bethesda-made Fallouts (3, 4, and '76) are any good. But if Obsidian and Bethesda both become under Microsoft's roof, then maybe Obsidian, which contains people who worked on the original Fallouts, will get to make the next Fallout game.

I think freeing Bethesda from Altman's management is a very good thing - so long as whatever new management it comes under actually values and recognizes talent. Then Bethesda could shine like it hasn't since Morrowind. But I don't think it's possible for Bethesda to get worse than they currently are.
 
On one hand I really hate DLC. It has gotten to the point where the complete game is buying the DLC, meaning you get an incomplete game. I doubt many people know that most DLC's on the Switch are just 150kb files that unlock what's already in the game. On the other hand I hate the idea of Microsoft purchasing Zenimax because I know that at some point Microsoft is going to be the game Nazi and determine what platform gets what game. That or delayed game releases for other platforms that isn't Xbox.

I'm so torn with my hatred, I just wanna see both sides lose. Is that too much to ask?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top