Will Ubisoft Get Sued Over Watch Dogs?

[Solariabsg25]

I've seen some of the controversy over the graphical content of Watchdogs, with some outlandish conspiracy theories claiming that graphical coding for the PC version was deliberately buried on orders of Microsoft to ensure the PC version didn't look "prettier" than the Xbox One version.

That being said, As far as I know, the law-suit against Gearbox for the fact that Aliens Colonial Marines didn't look graphically as good as the demo did at E3 is still ongoing - could the same thing happen here?

A:CM gameplay different to E3 - SUE THEM!

Bioshock Infinite gameplay different to E3 - Nothing said.

A:CM graphics not as good as E3 - SUE THEM!

Watchdogs graphics not as good as E3 - watch this space.

I'm not sure why anyone would believe that Microsoft would hobble a PC game that way, because it's pretty much accepted by absolutely everyone on the planet that a game on the PC will almost always be able to be graphically superior to a console game.

Now, if they'd have made them sabotage the PS4 version......

 

[Owain Taggart]

I doubt it. Unfortunately, this kind of thing is quite common, especially considering it's a multi-platform title appearing on the last-gen consoles. A game that has to cater to older tech will never look quite as good due to the limitations imposed by the tech. Also, it would be quite natural to assume that anything changes during development. Being that Ubisoft loves to overprocess their trailers, it's also never going to look as good as what is shown in them due to them oversampling and then downconverting their footage and they have been called on that.

 

[Solariabsg25]

The strange thing is, graphics seem to be the main focus of a lot of games these days.

"Ooooh look at that! The arm hairs are SOOOOO detailed! What a fantastic game!"

Yeah okay, but the campaign is only three hours long, and the multi-players broken as people use mods to auto-target and fire so they can rack up kills just by wandering about the map!

"Yeah, but the arm hairs man! Arm Hairs!!!!"

I used to play a lot of FPS games, but to be honest since I finished Black Ops II in one day, COD is dead to me, and it's put me off most of the others. I'll get Star Wars Battlefront as I loved the last two, but everything else is pretty "meh".

I never believe anything at E3 especially when it states "Actual Game Play!"

Or should that be "Actual Game Play if you have a three grand gaming beast PC!"

 

[Aragorn]

The Aliens story was something different. If I remember correctly, Gearbox did nothing with the game, outsourced it, then there were too many chefs in the kitchen, then they took it back and changed everything.

I've heard the stories about Microsoft before though, that they wouldn't take a game for Xbox if it looked better on PlayStation. That I believe.

 

[Rincewiend]

It's about this,right?!?

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b43ZlqPvBDs&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ[/yt]

 

[Solariabsg25]

Yep, that's the thing.

See, I don't personally think it's a big issue, but some out there do.

As to the Aliens: Colonial Marines lawsuit, I've seen a copy of the suit filed, and I still don't get a lot of the major issues - ONE plaintiff is bringing the case on the basis that - well okay here's one part from the suit:-

"Defendants, acting with knowledge, intentionally and unlawfully brought harm upon
Plaintiff and the Class by representing that the video game Aliens: Colonial Marines would be of a certain quality and contain those specific features shown in the "actual gameplay" demonstrations when in fact Defendants were unwilling or unable to release a retail product consistent with such representations."

Now, intentionally and willingly brought harm?? Seems a tad harsh to me.

 

[JarodRussell]

It would be absolutely catastrophic if you could successfully sue a game developer because the trailer, alpha or whatever looked different than the final release. Gameplay mechanic components can be thrown out if they cause problems. Graphics can be thrown out if they cause problems. That's simply the way it is with things that don't turn out the way it was intended.

What's next, sueing a film studio because they didn't shoot a scene in the script, or - better example - cut it out for the final release, when it was already featured in a trailer?

Doesn't every official gameplay trailer come with a disclaimer saying everything might be subject to change anyways these days?

 

[{ Emilia }]

I think the producers of every movie that sucked even though the trailer looked fun should be sued.

 

[Solariabsg25]

I can well imagine future E3 events stating "Here's some artwork of what we want to put in the game, but we can't show you a demo as the game's still six months away from release, and we got sued last time as a character's hair was a different colour in the demo which caused people trauma as they only wanted a protagonist with light brown hair."

That's obviously taking it to ridiculous extremes, but we know what the current sue-happy society is like, if one is successful, then loads will want a bit of the pie.

And a movie analogy is interesting - could you then in theory sue if something appears in the trailer but is cut from the movie? Claiming you only went to see the movie because X happened in the trailer?

 

[Aragorn]

What's next, sueing a film studio because they didn't shoot a scene in the script, or - better example - cut it out for the final release, when it was already featured in a trailer?

One of the most quoted lines from Major League wasn't even from the movie because it was in the trailer. Time to file suit!!!

 

[martok2112]

A few things here:

1. I will never ever believe a word Randy Pitchford ever says...again....EVER. (That said, I thought A:CM was an enjoyable, if highly flawed, and very short sold game.)

2. I won't put anything past Micro$oft anymore, after their debacle with Xbox One (announcing extreme DRM, no used-game sales, constant requirement to be online, constant Kinnect, etc....and then they rescinded it to try and make themselves sound as if they "listened to you, the gamers!"....I call shenanigans. ) I will not be purchasing an Xbox One until it is proven to me beyond the shadow of a shadow of a doubt that they absolutely will not attempt to reinstate those previous bullet points upon getting a high installed user base. So, that will take years of convincing in my book. Meantime, I'll stick with Xbox 360, PS3, PS Vita, and PS4. (My roomie, who is a very big Xbox fan, won't even look at an Xbox One because of the shenanigans.) I really wanted to be an early adopter of both Xbox One and PS4 for this generation, but M$ dropped the ball.

Doesn't every official gameplay trailer come with a disclaimer saying everything might be subject to change anyways these days?

Well, not every demo comes with such a disclaimer, but many do. The demos that don't come with quality disclaimers are generally the ones that are made available upon full game release.

 

[FPAlpha]

I really don't understand this lawsuit.

Someone is suing because the company maybe releases their own product in an inferior quality?

Isn't it their right to do so if they want and wouldn't they do this at their own peril commercially speaking? At what point does an entertainment company have to, by law, oblige its customers?

It may be different for other products like food, medicine and technical devices that have the potential for physical harm that have to meet basic requirements but this is a friggin' game.

Ubisoft could release it with C64 type graphics if they wanted to, it's their game and i can't understand customers demanding by law that the game has to be a certain way.

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Game devs and publishers releasing broken games are only one half of the problem, gamers also need to stop pre-ordering games period, they need to stop throwing money at Game devs and publishers with gay abandon, and then complain when they get a broken game, then go pre-order the next game.

Stop rewarding them up front and possibly they might take more time to produce a better product, because they will have to actually sell it to you, rather than just throw something at you because they already got your cash in a massive quick cash launch grab.

 

[Solariabsg25]

Game devs and publishers releasing broken games are only one half of the problem, gamers also need to stop pre-ordering games period, they need to stop throwing money at Game devs and publishers with gay abandon, and then complain when they get a broken game, then go pre-order the next game.

Stop rewarding them up front and possibly they might take more time to produce a better product, because they will have to actually sell it to you, rather than just throw something at you because they already got your cash in a massive quick cash launch grab.

This I wholeheartedly agree with.

Numerous people pre-order games paying double or even treble the price just because they get some free DLC that 99% of the time is released in a few months anyways and costing less than the game+pre-order did.

Then they complain that the lastest COD isn't as good as the previous one.

A year later though, there they are, pre-ordering the new COD!

 

[martok2112]

I completely agree with "no more pre-ordering".
Sure, the companies like to throw a lot of "swag" in to sweeten the deal, but at the end of the day, sometimes one wonders if it's really worth it?

Aliens Colonial Marines (as much as I did find enjoyment in that game for all its flaws and short sells) pretty much broke the deal for me on pre-orders. There was only one other game I pre-ordered after that: The Last of Us...and that was a truly worthy game.

But, I figure if I don't pre-order a game, and I like it well enough, I'll buy the DLC that was offered for free if you did pre-order it. If I didn't like the game, well, I can just take it back, and Bob's Yer Uncle.

But if there is ONE invaluable lesson I have learned through this whole mess: Never trust a thing Randy Pitchford says.

Ok....two things:
Never trust Micro$oft either.

 

[Solariabsg25]

I actually enjoyed Colonial Marines. There were some criticisms such as the fact that you did face human troops as well as aliens, but people forget that the aliens in the movie actually aren't that tough to deal with.

Even Cameron had to kill most of the Marines and lose the majority of their weapons, ammunition and equipment in order to give the aliens any kind of hope against them.

 

[RoJoHen]

Pre-ordering always seemed silly to me. The truly worthwhile DLC usually doesn't even get released until months after the game has been out anyway. Things like "The Last of Us" and "Arkham Origins" had whole new campaigns added as DLC several months later.

Pre-ordering a game just so you can get some different skins or "play as [insert random character]" seems like a waste.

If there were truly a shortage of games, I could see the need to pre-order to make sure you get a copy...but I've never encountered a game that I couldn't just walk into the store and buy on a whim.

 

[Reverend]

By and large, pre-ordering a digital product makes very little sense. In "Ye Olde Times" the point of pre-ordering anything was to reserve a copy of a product so you didn't have to about it going out of stock.

As for the DLC...for the most part pre-order DLC is pretty pointless. It's usually either throwaway cosmetic tat or overpowered items that can really mess with the balance of the game. I'm of two minds as to whether or not I like the idea of more substantive DLC though since some of the worst pre-order bonues in recent memory has been the 'From Ashes' DLC for Mass Effect 3. Didn't affect me personally since I had decided to go for the physical Collector's Edition anyway (I wanted to own at least one of trilogy as a physical thing.)

One company that dose seem to have the right idea though is CD Projekt Red who are offering a ton of stuff for the (DRM free!) Witcher 3 pre-order including a free copy of a classic RPG, a loyalty discount for those that own one or both of the previous games AND store credit for those screwed over by international price differences! I still probably won't go for it since I still haven't finished the first game and barely touched the second, so I'll probably wait a year or so for Wild Hunt, but still, I very much respect what they're doing with it. Those cats really respect their customer base.

These days I'm actually inclined to wait a good six months to a year before getting a game simply because the prices on PC tend to drop fairly quickly. Nevertheless the upcoming release of Dragon Age Inquisition has me torn.
I mean I don't care about the pre-order weapons pack or any of that nonsense, I just really want to play the game...but experience tells me that if I wait, the core game price will half, making the prices on the inevitable story DLC easier to stomach and it'd spare me the usual RPG launch buggyness that I've had on every Bioware game since ME2.

 

[Timby]

The Aliens story was something different. If I remember correctly, Gearbox did nothing with the game, outsourced it, then there were too many chefs in the kitchen, then they took it back and changed everything.

Close. Gearbox was taking the money Sega was paying for development milestones and instead using most of it to fund Borderlands and barely working on A:CM. Sega found out, took the game away from Gearbox, outsourced what little had been done to TimeGate (which was completely inadequate and unprepared for the work), and had Gearbox essentially act as project managers for the TimeGate crew ... which they sucked at, and so Sega finally decided to cut its losses and release the game as-is.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Yeah, definitely agree about the pre-ordering. I feel it's gotten out of hand. I've never done it myself as I can't justify putting a lot of money on already expensive games. It's not uncommon for collector's editions to sell for roughly $100 here. And then DLCs? If I'm going to be paying a premium, then I expect the DLCs to go along with it.