Lawsuit Filed Against Sega, Gearbox for False Advertising

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I particularly dont like Pitchford. He takes something amazing and turns into shit. I hope he learns a fucking lesson. Now he is ruining my all time favourite Brother in Arms...
 
I've never been one to buy a game on release day (bugs are not uncommon), but if the claim "actual gameplay footage" is untrue, then it is indeed false advertising. Telling lies, particularly in pursuit of financial gain, needs to have serious consequences.
 
yea i wait till a few months after a title is released to purchase it soemtimes a year or two depending on what i am willing to pay for it (exceptions for WoW expantions and a select few games like portal 2). but if the demo did in fact claim to be actual game footage that was not in the game and ha dbetter art/rendering than the actual game can deliver then i would say their lawsuit has merit
 
Right, Gearbox call's it frivolous that the end product in almost every shape and form was stripped down from the nearly 1 year old 'game play' demo they presented. Normally it's industry practice to release demo's that are small pieces of the resulting end product, with the final product building up from that, instead they took pieces away shoving this crap into market as fast as possible and when the ball dropped pointed fingers at everyone else saying it was someone else's fault like little children. Gearbox and Sega are going to spend a lot of money on this lawsuit, if it goes through both of them are closing shop, they sure as hell wont be able to afford it.
 
I have never played this. Is there anyone here who saw (or played) the demo, who later bought the game that can give merit to these ideas?
It sounds like a butthurt consumer. If the demo really was THAT different from the actual gameplay, then I retract my statement. But places like E3 are usually for showing works in progress.
Regardless, the terminology "actual gameplay" does not mean "actual retail version gameplay." It just means that the images aren't pre-rendered/scripted movies. It was "actual" demo gameplay. I'd be fairly certain to think that there's some disclaimer that went along with the demo version that explicitly states that it may or may not be similar to the final release.
I looked at the slideshow comparing the 2012 and 2013 versions--I wouldn't say that the differences are significant to claim false advertising.
Lastly, be an informed consumer. Don't assume that a demo appropriately represents a final release. It goes both directions--sometimes a demo is much WORSE than the final version. Wait for official reviews, and don't be trigger-happy.
I especially don't see this having merit for anyone who pre-ordered the game. That pre-supposes that they were going to buy the game regardless of review...
 
Well during showcase demo they wanna present what's best, but sometimes it may not end up being possible in production software.
If it is this way, then Rare should be sued too for Banjo Tooie. Banjo Kazooie promoted it as going to have some neat features, that weren't available at all.
 


Uhh... whatever this guy is smoking, stay away from. It has made him retarded.

The most anyone could claim in damages in the retail value of the software. With how poorly this game sold neither Sega nor Gearbox would "close shop" even if they refunded 100% of the purchases done on or before release day.

Yes the game sucked, it happens all the time.

This game was set to be another Duke Nukem with the amount of developers that had been involved with it. So go to the team that got Duke Nukem out, gearbox to the rescue. Instead of dragging out the development, they just decided put as much polish on the turd as possible, then released whatever they had.

 
Eh, fast food was a bad example. You eat your burger not stare at it so it is not really misleading advertising. Dressing up a game to look like more than it is seems a lot more misleading. Good AI is a game play element and if it is not there when you actually get to playing...
 
someone should sue EA for saying that SimCity 5 was going to be so awesome and full of great features and then providing a pile of sh!t!
 
You know what could've prevented some of the negative backlash? The game they showed. Honestly I hope they lose bad on this one. It was a clear bait and switch move and they deceived thousands of people in order to make millions of dollars.
 
You know what could've prevented some of the negative backlash? The game they showed. Honestly I hope they lose bad on this one. It was a clear bait and switch move and they deceived thousands of people in order to make millions of dollars.
 
One of the things that came up in earlier articles about this mess is that Gearbox took all of Sega's money, used it to build Borderlands 2, and then delivered a Aliens game that just barely met the contract stipulations.
I think this lawsuit as a small amount of merit, because ultimately the customer paid for one product and delivered another. That's different than if a customer got to play a product first and then decided whether to buy it.
Dry
 
Hmm, easily solved in the future, before every demo video or gameplay a message "Gameplay and graphics may differ in the final retail product, everything displayed here is for demonstration purposes only"
 
"To be honest, fast food restaurants do it all the time, serving up awesome-looking burgers on TV but sliding customers an ugly greasy ball of meat and bread in real-time. "
Don't know about you guys, but I am usually pretty happy with how my food looks, compared to the picture. Funny thing is, when my fast food was not as advertised, I have either got it replaced, gotten my money back, or both!
 
The problem with showcasing live product demos is that things can change between then and the final product. It's a demo.
Click to expand...

True but demos don't show sections of gameplay that are completely removed, some elements remain. Actual gameplay doesn't get worse, different yes, but not worse. You can't qualify a burger from a restaurant as the same thing, millions of people making millions of products vs a company making a single cloned product. If McDonald's could make a perfect BigMac and create identical copies they would. The released version of the game is a completely different product from the demo.

Beside Pitchford said they ended up ripping out what was in the demo then released it, yet they didn't let anybody know about such and obvious discrepancy.
 
I hope they get pinned to the wall and have to refund the money for every copy and remove all defective copys from shelfs plus advertise worldwide an apology for such a discracefull product. This case needs to be used as an example of how not to make a game for all to see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom