Should There Be Legal Ramifications for Knowingly Releasing Unfinished Product?

[KushSkywalker]

I just noticed that it's more and more the norm to meet a deadline with an unfinished product and rush/hope that you can get a day one patch out to fix everything.

Assassins Greed, Drive Club and and Halo got me thinking, maybe these companies would stop doing this is if there was some sort of punishment.

Coca Cola can't sell me a coke that's labeled 16 oz, only put 10 oz. in it and then say "by the time you're home you'll have the other 6 oz.!"

That's not legal right?

So if a game has advertised features etc. that the developer KNOWS will potentially have issues on launch day, should they not be required to not go gold or delay the game?






Like everyone mostly bought Halo:MCC for MP, yet that's the one thing not working right.

Everyone bought BF4 for MP, yet that wasn't working right.

Lots of people bought GTA for MP and Heists, MP didn't work for a while and heists still didn't hit.

I for one know heists were a big selling point on me picking that game up.







How can you charge money for a product with advertised features that you know may not work?

Didn't EA get sued for knowing BF4 wasn't going to work launch day and misleading investors anyway?

Any Coli legal brehs? Class Action?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

With the unpredictable nature of online games it would be difficult to prove a dev knowingly put out an "unfinished" game.

 

[KushSkywalker]

With the unpredictable nature of online games it would be difficult to prove a dev knowingly put out an "unfinished" game.

This is true.

But Bungie managed to run a stress test that prevented any issues.

Also if a patch is ready day 1, than should it have even went gold?

This isn't just MP either, Day 1 patch is fine, but some of these Day 1 patches are massive and feel like part of the normal development cycle.

Like they went gold just cause of a predetermined release date instead of fixing the code before pressing.

How are we downloading multi gig patches day 1?

 

[capp34]

Consumers need to have some balls and stopping running to the store on release day.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

This is true.

But Bungie managed to run a stress test that prevented any issues.

Also if a patch is ready day 1, than should it have even went gold?

This isn't just MP either, Day 1 patch is fine, but some of these Day 1 patches are massive and feel like part of the normal development cycle.

Like they went gold just cause of a predetermined release date instead of fixing the code before pressing.

How are we downloading multi gig patches day 1?

Sadly its the nature of the business. Everyday your game is not on shelves you're losing money. There's pressure to get the game on shelves just to continue to pay salaries.

I'm ok with games having SOME issues at launch. There's a lot of variables to consider and sometimes devs just can't test all scenarios.

With the most egregious examples like Diveclub and Halo you have to think the devs knew what was going on before they released the game. Or at least they knew they didn't test enough.

Not really sure what we as gamers should do about it though. As troubled as the halo launch is, I'm still playing everyday and having a lot of fun. Wouldn't want to not be playing the game so.....

 

[KushSkywalker]

Sadly its the nature of the business. Everyday your game is not on shelves you're losing money. There's pressure to get the game on shelves just to continue to pay salaries.

I'm ok with games having SOME issues at launch. There's a lot of variables to consider and sometimes devs just can't test all scenarios.

With the most egregious examples like Diveclub and Halo you have to think the devs knew what was going on before they released the game. Or at least they knew they didn't test enough.

Not really sure what we as gamers should do about it though. As troubled as the halo launch is, I'm still playing everyday and having a lot of fun. Wouldn't want to not be playing the game so.....

I know what you mean man.

They know we got ADHD and wanna play that next shyt.

Like I bought GTA 5 twice just to play online with PS3 and 360 brehs, and actually don't regret it.

But Rockstar got rich off people like me even though they left out a lot of advertised features and had a super rocky start online.

Am I the problem?

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I know what you mean man.

They know we got ADHD and wanna play that next shyt.

Like I bought GTA 5 twice just to play online with PS3 and 360 brehs, and actually don't regret it.

But Rockstar got rich off people like me even though they left out a lot of advertised features and had a super rocky start online.

Am I the problem?

Yes you are breh, we all are

 

[Fatboi1]

Is heists even coming to last gen??

 

[Detroit Wave]

consumers gotta get smarter. but the majority of them wont because they still buy consoles

 

[The Phoenix]

Consumers need to have some balls and stopping running to the store on release day.

THIS.....a thousand times THIS. People seem to actively bet against there best interests quite often so this will only continue.

 

[beenz]

consumers gotta get smarter. but the majority of them wont because they still buy consoles

THIS.....a thousand times THIS. People seem to actively bet against there best interests quite often so this will only continue.

I totally agree with both of these statements. this isn't like the 80's where I had to make a judgement call on a game based on the cover and a couple of pictures on the back of the box.

these days we got internet and a bunch of sites and people doing a shytload of reviews on EVERY game that drops. there's absolutely no reason to be uninformed and copping shytty games in this era and potentially wasting $60.

 

[-DMP-]

Is heists even coming to last gen??

yea, supposedly in the first update. read it on GAF yesterday.

-DMP-

 

[GoldenGlove]

Outside of launch titles, there's no reason why these multiplayer games shouldn't have an extensive beta before launch.

Assassin's Creed being messed up is because Ubi just don't give a fukk

 

[winb83]

I just noticed that it's more and more the norm to meet a deadline with an unfinished product and rush/hope that you can get a day one patch out to fix everything.

Assassins Greed, Drive Club and and Halo got me thinking, maybe these companies would stop doing this is if there was some sort of punishment.

Coca Cola can't sell me a coke that's labeled 16 oz, only put 10 oz. in it and then say "by the time you're home you'll have the other 6 oz.!"

That's not legal right?

So if a game has advertised features etc. that the developer KNOWS will potentially have issues on launch day, should they not be required to not go gold or delay the game?






Like everyone mostly bought Halo:MCC for MP, yet that's the one thing not working right.

Everyone bought BF4 for MP, yet that wasn't working right.

Lots of people bought GTA for MP and Heists, MP didn't work for a while and heists still didn't hit.

I for one know heists were a big selling point on me picking that game up.







How can you charge money for a product with advertised features that you know may not work?

Didn't EA get sued for knowing BF4 wasn't going to work launch day and misleading investors anyway?

Any Coli legal brehs? Class Action?

Define unfinished product when it comes to a piece of software. Assassin's Creed Unity is a functional product and it's playable. I've played it. It might not be the best game it could have been but it works.

 

[Cladyclad]

companies should have to pay a fine each day their service is not functioning. people who paid for DC & B4 should get some sort of voucher or something. this sh1t aint right