• SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    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.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

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

        Sure that’s not hypocritical at all….

    • MarauderIIC@dormi.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      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.

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        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.

        • MarauderIIC@dormi.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          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.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            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?