Sega Admits to Inaccurate Aliens: Colonial Marines Trailer

Sega Admits to Inaccurate Aliens: Colonial Marines Trailer

image

Sega has officially acknowledged that trailers advertising Aliens: Colonial Marines "did not accurately reflect" the game.

Remember how great those Aliens: Colonial Marines trailers looked? And then the game came out and people were all, "Wait a minute," because it somehow didn't look so great, and everyone was wondering what happened? Sega claims the discrepancies weren't actually its fault, but has now acknowledged that the promos are not an accurate representation of the game.

Prompted by a complaint from Reddit user "Subpardave," the U.K.'s Advertising Standards Authority contacted Sega to inquire about the ads. "[Sega Europe] explained that their online trailers used demo footage, created using the in-game engine," the ASA said in a letter sent to Subpardave. "Sega Europe understood the objections raised about the quality of the game in relation to the trailers, but explained that they weren't aware of these issues when the trailers were produced, in some cases several months before release."

"Sega Europe acknowledged your objection that the trailers did not accurately reflect the final content of the game," the letter states. "They agreed to add a disclaimer, both on their website and in all relevant YouTube videos, which explains that the trailers depict footage of the demo versions of the game. The disclaimer will be visible when each online trailer is played."

The ASA "informally" upheld the complaint, publishing the resolution on its website, but as nice as a public admission to inaccurate advertising may be, its value is questionable at best. People unaware of the Colonial Marines fiasco who see that disclaimer are, I would think, far more likely to assume that the final product is better, not worse, than the promo. After all, you see "not representative of the final product" disclaimers on promo materials all the time; unless there's more to it than suggested by the ASA letter, how is this any different?

Source: Reddit

Permalink

Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

You know I think Gearbox is to be blamed for this one. Sega just gave them the money and signed a contract thinking they will deliver a good game. Gearbox acted unprofessionally neglecting their agreement and focusing more on Boarderlands 2 and outsourcing development of Aliens which eventually impacted the quality of the game.

I still feel pretty sorry for SEGA in this. They were pretty much screwed over by Gearbox and their mistake was basically not being aggressive and horrible enough to the developers.

And then after years of no work, finally the devs give Sega something that looks decent, their PR team flouts it to the world and then it all gets ripped back out and it turns out doesn't actually function in game

if it was demo footage WTF happened to the good demo?!

Captcha: rhode island

Good idea Captcha! Maybe rhode island can give these guy advice on how to make games considering how well it went last time

kajinking:
if it was demo footage WTF happened to the good demo?!

The problem is that there was never an actual game "demo" it was a demo indeed, but not from the game, the guys that did that one have said that they were told to make the demo as impresive as it could be, no matter what the actual game was like.

False advertisement at its best.

For those of you that played through Bioshock Infinite, look up the 2010 'gameplay footage'on yourtube. Elizabeth commanding the weather and using telekinesis. Entire set pieces that are never seen in the game (like the awesome collapsing bell tower).

Gameplay demos are not to be trusted, ever. Just wait for the game to come out, and then wait for the reviews to flow in.

Andy Chalk:
Sega claims the discrepancies weren't actually its fault

It was your fault, SEGA. It was your job to make sure Gearbox was doing their job. You failed, and thus you share some of the blame for the game and the trailers/demos being different.

Also you share some of the blame for screwing myself and many other people out of our hard earned money. I'm sick of seeing people saying "Oh poor SEGA, Gearbox screwed them over." No, not poor SEGA. Poor us. Gearbox screwed SEGA over because SEGA let themselves get screwed over, and then SEGA turned around and screwed us over. Fuck SEGA.

So...what are they actually admitting? That there's a problem but it was totally not their fault so they can just slap "from demo" on their videos, but not actually clarify what the issue is, thereby washing their hands of legal liability?

Am I supposed to clap for them or something? This is such a huge first step for Sega.

weirdguy:
So...what are they actually admitting? That there's a problem but it was totally not their fault so they can just slap "from demo" on their videos, but not actually clarify what the issue is, thereby washing their hands of legal liability?

Am I supposed to clap for them or something? This is such a huge first step for Sega.

Basically they're sayin that they made the footage thinkin it was representative of the final product, or at the very least that it looked great and they could sell it to people. They're still sayin they had no idea that the game was completely not representative of the material that Gearbox actually made.

mjc0961:

Andy Chalk:
Sega claims the discrepancies weren't actually its fault

It was your fault, SEGA. It was your job to make sure Gearbox was doing their job. You failed, and thus you share some of the blame for the game and the trailers/demos being different.

Also you share some of the blame for screwing myself and many other people out of our hard earned money. I'm sick of seeing people saying "Oh poor SEGA, Gearbox screwed them over." No, not poor SEGA. Poor us. Gearbox screwed SEGA over because SEGA let themselves get screwed over, and then SEGA turned around and screwed us over. Fuck SEGA.

Yeah, Fuck SEGA for doin what so many people wish publishers would do! Give their developers as much leeway as they need to make the greatest game possible.

The true fuck you goes to Gearbox here, no ifs ands or buts about it. They fucked everyone over. They squandered the resources SEGA gave them to make Aliens Colonial Marines. They tried to shift the blame to a completely different developer that they themselves picked out to make the game while they worked on Borderlands. They're the ones who sold the game knowin fully and completely that it was nowhere near as good as what people thought it was.

Not only did they willfully and purposely fuck over the consumers, they've now given the biggest example to publishers on why they should keep the reigns as tight as possible on developers. Don't listen to them when they ask for extensions. Don't throw money at them when they say they need more. Don't give them any sort of leeway whatsoever. Why? Because when SEGA gave Gearbox that inch, they ran as fast and as far as they could with it and ended up fuckin everyone over.

Well, I guess we won't see anymore Gearbox games getting published by Sega...

Captcha: Captcha in the Rye

shintakie10:

mjc0961:

It was your fault, SEGA. It was your job to make sure Gearbox was doing their job. You failed, and thus you share some of the blame for the game and the trailers/demos being different.

Also you share some of the blame for screwing myself and many other people out of our hard earned money. I'm sick of seeing people saying "Oh poor SEGA, Gearbox screwed them over." No, not poor SEGA. Poor us. Gearbox screwed SEGA over because SEGA let themselves get screwed over, and then SEGA turned around and screwed us over. Fuck SEGA.

Yeah, Fuck SEGA for doin what so many people wish publishers would do! Give their developers as much leeway as they need to make the greatest game possible.

The true fuck you goes to Gearbox here, no ifs ands or buts about it. They fucked everyone over. They squandered the resources SEGA gave them to make Aliens Colonial Marines. They tried to shift the blame to a completely different developer that they themselves picked out to make the game while they worked on Borderlands. They're the ones who sold the game knowin fully and completely that it was nowhere near as good as what people thought it was.

Not only did they willfully and purposely fuck over the consumers, they've now given the biggest example to publishers on why they should keep the reigns as tight as possible on developers. Don't listen to them when they ask for extensions. Don't throw money at them when they say they need more. Don't give them any sort of leeway whatsoever. Why? Because when SEGA gave Gearbox that inch, they ran as fast and as far as they could with it and ended up fuckin everyone over.

you know, I'm with mjc here.

Back when I worked in Construction with my dad, ignorance was never a feasible excuse for half assed stuff. We saw a lot of Contractors go through with substandard work. And as a consequence, a lot of unlivable apartments were passed off as good.

The client has a responsibility to the renter as we have the building code. Even if the contractors are the ones who messed up, the client as the owner is responsible for any complaint a renter has as long as it is a grievance that the building code validates. I.e. The Renter can't sue because the paint is hideous, but the Renter can complain and sue if there's not enough ventilation in the apartment.

It is the responsibility of the client (representing SEGA in this analogy) to talk to the Architect and make sure the building is being designed as planned. Most serious clients and architects have building tours two times every month at the very least. I balk at the idea that Sega couldn't have been arsed to stick it's head at least four times in the Six freaking years (Sega annouced they were working on it December 11 2006 and that Gearbox was taking the lead on December 15 of the same year) and say "Shit, Gearbox, what are you doing here? My name is on the line."

December 11 2006 to Feburary 12 2013. And Sega had no idea what was happening? Even if that was true, they earned this backlash. Because that is the stupidest thing any owner could ever do, just attach their name to a product and not have idea what what's going on with it.

captcha: surf and turf. I don't have any idea what drugs you're smoking, Captcha, but I like your style.

Haven't seen anything to imply that this wasn't Gearbox's fault, and a lot of accusations and "leaks" pointing the finger at Gearbox. I actually feel sorry for the publisher in all of this, because either way, whether or not Gearbox outsourced most of the game, SEGA got screwed over and lost their money on an honest investment.

Yeah, I still see Sega as responsible for overseeing the work. It's not as if they have to micromanage them or demand random things...just being able to see their work in action (not even a demo, just an actual piece of work in action) would have at least hinted at the rate of development. Developer being a derp? Derp should have their asses keelhauled for not delivering (especially when money's been paid), by the appropriate party, which is Sega.

Even not regarding that, I think Sega still should take responsibility as the highest ranking part of this mess, just because they need a unified leader to make amends for the issue. Trying to dodge culpability in this manner speaks of a desire to sweep the issue under the rug, rather than settle it in the way a responsible party does.

However, the main reason why shipping a box of crap was their "best" option is still the fault of a market which would pull their money from a product if the company was open about not having their product ready for launch. There really isn't any other way around those circumstances as our human expectations aren't really built to work that way.

Wow. So Sega admits the trailer inaccuracies AFTER being inquired by the ASA? You see Sega? Just because we were distracted getting farted on our faces by EA/Maxis and the disastrous Sim City launch, doesn't mean we forgot about you Gearbox and Colonial Marines.

So did everyone who bought the game get a refund? Or the option to get one?

ObsidianJones:

shintakie10:

mjc0961:

It was your fault, SEGA. It was your job to make sure Gearbox was doing their job. You failed, and thus you share some of the blame for the game and the trailers/demos being different.

Also you share some of the blame for screwing myself and many other people out of our hard earned money. I'm sick of seeing people saying "Oh poor SEGA, Gearbox screwed them over." No, not poor SEGA. Poor us. Gearbox screwed SEGA over because SEGA let themselves get screwed over, and then SEGA turned around and screwed us over. Fuck SEGA.

Yeah, Fuck SEGA for doin what so many people wish publishers would do! Give their developers as much leeway as they need to make the greatest game possible.

The true fuck you goes to Gearbox here, no ifs ands or buts about it. They fucked everyone over. They squandered the resources SEGA gave them to make Aliens Colonial Marines. They tried to shift the blame to a completely different developer that they themselves picked out to make the game while they worked on Borderlands. They're the ones who sold the game knowin fully and completely that it was nowhere near as good as what people thought it was.

Not only did they willfully and purposely fuck over the consumers, they've now given the biggest example to publishers on why they should keep the reigns as tight as possible on developers. Don't listen to them when they ask for extensions. Don't throw money at them when they say they need more. Don't give them any sort of leeway whatsoever. Why? Because when SEGA gave Gearbox that inch, they ran as fast and as far as they could with it and ended up fuckin everyone over.

you know, I'm with mjc here.

Back when I worked in Construction with my dad, ignorance was never a feasible excuse for half assed stuff. We saw a lot of Contractors go through with substandard work. And as a consequence, a lot of unlivable apartments were passed off as good.

The client has a responsibility to the renter as we have the building code. Even if the contractors are the ones who messed up, the client as the owner is responsible for any complaint a renter has as long as it is a grievance that the building code validates. I.e. The Renter can't sue because the paint is hideous, but the Renter can complain and sue if there's not enough ventilation in the apartment.

It is the responsibility of the client (representing SEGA in this analogy) to talk to the Architect and make sure the building is being designed as planned. Most serious clients and architects have building tours two times every month at the very least. I balk at the idea that Sega couldn't have been arsed to stick it's head at least four times in the Six freaking years (Sega annouced they were working on it December 11 2006 and that Gearbox was taking the lead on December 15 of the same year) and say "Shit, Gearbox, what are you doing here? My name is on the line."

December 11 2006 to Feburary 12 2013. And Sega had no idea what was happening? Even if that was true, they earned this backlash. Because that is the stupidest thing any owner could ever do, just attach their name to a product and not have idea what what's going on with it.

captcha: surf and turf. I don't have any idea what drugs you're smoking, Captcha, but I like your style.

I've never said SEGA doesn't deserve some blame. I remember my second reaction to this entire fiasco bein "Did no one in 6 years even ask so hows the game we paid you to make coming along?" That was still after my first reaction of "So Gearbox just blatantly ripped everyone off here huh? Well, that sucks ass."

edit - I just had a captcha that asked me to describe this brand in my own words. I wrote shitty shitty crap crap shitty shitty crap crap shitty crap and it let me post.

How fuckin useless was that captcha at stoppin spam?

ObsidianJones:
you know, I'm with mjc here.

Back when I worked in Construction with my dad, ignorance was never a feasible excuse for half assed stuff. We saw a lot of Contractors go through with substandard work. And as a consequence, a lot of unlivable apartments were passed off as good.

The client has a responsibility to the renter as we have the building code. Even if the contractors are the ones who messed up, the client as the owner is responsible for any complaint a renter has as long as it is a grievance that the building code validates. I.e. The Renter can't sue because the paint is hideous, but the Renter can complain and sue if there's not enough ventilation in the apartment.

It is the responsibility of the client (representing SEGA in this analogy) to talk to the Architect and make sure the building is being designed as planned. Most serious clients and architects have building tours two times every month at the very least. I balk at the idea that Sega couldn't have been arsed to stick it's head at least four times in the Six freaking years (Sega annouced they were working on it December 11 2006 and that Gearbox was taking the lead on December 15 of the same year) and say "Shit, Gearbox, what are you doing here? My name is on the line."

December 11 2006 to Feburary 12 2013. And Sega had no idea what was happening? Even if that was true, they earned this backlash. Because that is the stupidest thing any owner could ever do, just attach their name to a product and not have idea what what's going on with it.

captcha: surf and turf. I don't have any idea what drugs you're smoking, Captcha, but I like your style.

The problem is, as a producer, if you were to rap Gearbox over the knuckles about their failure with the title what then? Development studios are notorious for not being able to handle even the slightest of financial woes - what if they were to be sued for breach of contract? It's essentially trying to get blood out of a stone. I think Sega saw the mess, discussed their options and decided to cut their losses.

It's like with banks, if you owe the bank $100,000 they've got you by the balls. If you owe the bank $1,000,000,000 you've got THEM by the balls.

Gearbox was given the leeway that we wish Bioware was given by EA. Gearbox was given the leeway we wish Obsidian was given by Bethesda. All they've done is poo-pooed on the idea of giving a proven AAA developer the leeway to operate and produce a game without suits mucking the whole thing up. Prepare for more Sim City, Diablo III, Dragon Age II and Dead Space III negative producer influence.

shintakie10:
I've never said SEGA doesn't deserve some blame. I remember my second reaction to this entire fiasco bein "Did no one in 6 years even ask so hows the game we paid you to make coming along?" That was still after my first reaction of "So Gearbox just blatantly ripped everyone off here huh? Well, that sucks ass."

edit - I just had a captcha that asked me to describe this brand in my own words. I wrote shitty shitty crap crap shitty shitty crap crap shitty crap and it let me post.

How fuckin useless was that captcha at stoppin spam?

Odds are SEGA had full knowledge about the game's state before review copies went out. Don't forget that they implemented a review embargo until after release. That's usually a good sign that they knew it was terrible but didn't care.

LordLundar:

shintakie10:
I've never said SEGA doesn't deserve some blame. I remember my second reaction to this entire fiasco bein "Did no one in 6 years even ask so hows the game we paid you to make coming along?" That was still after my first reaction of "So Gearbox just blatantly ripped everyone off here huh? Well, that sucks ass."

edit - I just had a captcha that asked me to describe this brand in my own words. I wrote shitty shitty crap crap shitty shitty crap crap shitty crap and it let me post.

How fuckin useless was that captcha at stoppin spam?

Odds are SEGA had full knowledge about the game's state before review copies went out. Don't forget that they implemented a review embargo until after release. That's usually a good sign that they knew it was terrible but didn't care.

And I dont really blame them for that decision. As Abomination above points out, by the point the game was in a releasable state, or more likely SEGA finally had enough of the stalls and called Gearbox's bluff about needin more time, they didn't have a choice. You release the game and pray you get some sort of return on investment.

Its exactly like DNF in that regard. After a certain point and a certain amount of money spent, you can't justify goin "Whelp, thats a loss. Toss it in the trash." You have to try and get some sort of money out of that turd no matter how turd like it is.

Again, should SEGA have kept better tabs on Gearbox? Totally. I'm disturbed that they gave Gearbox the kind of leverage that only a company like Blizzard usually gets especially when, at that point, they weren't remotely what was considered a big player. However the fact is they gave a developer the kind of leeway that every one on this forum wishes developers got and Gearbox took that gift and shat all over it, then tried to give it to us as a gift. There's no way any publisher will give a developer this kind of freedom after this debacle.

Abomination:
The problem is, as a producer, if you were to rap Gearbox over the knuckles about their failure with the title what then? Development studios are notorious for not being able to handle even the slightest of financial woes - what if they were to be sued for breach of contract? It's essentially trying to get blood out of a stone. I think Sega saw the mess, discussed their options and decided to cut their losses.

It's like with banks, if you owe the bank $100,000 they've got you by the balls. If you owe the bank $1,000,000,000 you've got THEM by the balls.

Gearbox was given the leeway that we wish Bioware was given by EA. Gearbox was given the leeway we wish Obsidian was given by Bethesda. All they've done is poo-pooed on the idea of giving a proven AAA developer the leeway to operate and produce a game without suits mucking the whole thing up. Prepare for more Sim City, Diablo III, Dragon Age II and Dead Space III negative producer influence.

I think you're absolutely right.

I just want them to say that instead of saying 'Whoa, dude, it sucked?! We had no idea! Wow, someone should have told us. Sorry about that'

I have to agree with Andy. Adding the disclaimer to the trailers doesn't mean jack squat, since you're generally going to assume that the final product will be better. In fact, that's the whole reason why the "does not represent final product" disclaimer exists in the first place, so that they can show-off early footage of a game without having to worry about some currently-unpolished bit (maybe the AI is still clumsy, or some animations are a little choppy) reflecting badly on the game. Adding a disclaimer that has such connotations to a gameplay trailer that's MORE polished than the final product feels like it's still false advertising.

james.sponge:

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

You know I think Gearbox is to be blamed for this one. Sega just gave them the money and signed a contract thinking they will deliver a good game. Gearbox acted unprofessionally neglecting their agreement and focusing more on Boarderlands 2 and outsourcing development of Aliens which eventually impacted the quality of the game.

This a thousand times over. Not that Sega is competent, as the Sonic franchise has proven time and time again, but from my understanding Gearbox took Sega's money to make this game then decided to work on everything but that game during the next five / six years. After all, GB managed to not only buy Duke Nukem Forever and finish it, but then proceeded to make and release Borderlands 2 in it's entirety - all during ACM's development. Honestly, I'm not surprised if the rumors are true that Sega was forcing them to release the game unfinished or else would take them to court, as after six years of taking my money and doing fuck-all with it I'd be pissed too.

As for the disclaimer, everyone is right that it does nothing to inform people that the game is worse than the trailers make it seem and in fact the disclaimers will probably add more confusion, as one expects the final product to improve from it's demo stages rather than the other way around.

ObsidianJones:

Abomination:
The problem is, as a producer, if you were to rap Gearbox over the knuckles about their failure with the title what then? Development studios are notorious for not being able to handle even the slightest of financial woes - what if they were to be sued for breach of contract? It's essentially trying to get blood out of a stone. I think Sega saw the mess, discussed their options and decided to cut their losses.

It's like with banks, if you owe the bank $100,000 they've got you by the balls. If you owe the bank $1,000,000,000 you've got THEM by the balls.

Gearbox was given the leeway that we wish Bioware was given by EA. Gearbox was given the leeway we wish Obsidian was given by Bethesda. All they've done is poo-pooed on the idea of giving a proven AAA developer the leeway to operate and produce a game without suits mucking the whole thing up. Prepare for more Sim City, Diablo III, Dragon Age II and Dead Space III negative producer influence.

I think you're absolutely right.

I just want them to say that instead of saying 'Whoa, dude, it sucked?! We had no idea! Wow, someone should have told us. Sorry about that'

The problem there is the legal ramifications for making such a statement. Admitting publically that they knew they were producing shit and charging $60 for it would grant many people the option to demand a refund. No EULA would protect a company from a public statement of a faulty product.

The second issue is that Gearbox could turn around and sue for defamation.

This is a great big turd sandwich that Gearbox has served to everyone. The publisher has to produce it to recoup some of their investment and get the rap for that, the unfortunate consumer takes a bite and gets to savor the taste and other developers collectively facepalm at the precedent this will set for their publisher-developer relationships.

While Sega should have managed Gearbox better it was Gearbox who ultimately failed with this product. The product could have been produced to expectations with or without Sega using more strict oversight.

The trailers actually looked terrible.

The enemies clearly were scripted, and that corridor with the smartgun looked like the worst gameplay I've ever seen come out of an Aliens game.

If you had watched even 1 trailer before release you would've realised not to buy it.

V da Mighty Taco:

james.sponge:

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

You know I think Gearbox is to be blamed for this one. Sega just gave them the money and signed a contract thinking they will deliver a good game. Gearbox acted unprofessionally neglecting their agreement and focusing more on Boarderlands 2 and outsourcing development of Aliens which eventually impacted the quality of the game.

This a thousand times over. Not that Sega is competent, as the Sonic franchise has proven time and time again, but from my understanding Gearbox took Sega's money to make this game then decided to work on everything but that game during the next five / six years. After all, GB managed to not only buy Duke Nukem Forever and finish it, but then proceeded to make and release Borderlands 2 in it's entirety - all during ACM's development. Honestly, I'm not surprised if the rumors are true that Sega was forcing them to release the game unfinished or else would take them to court, as after six years of taking my money and doing fuck-all with it I'd be pissed too.

As for the disclaimer, everyone is right that it does nothing to inform people that the game is worse than the trailers make it seem and in fact the disclaimers will probably add more confusion, as one expects the final product to improve from it's demo stages rather than the other way around.

Well, if Gearbox took SEGA's money, in over a period of 6 years released, Borderlands, DNF, and a ass load of Brothers in Arms games, then maybe SEGA doesnt really have a foot to stand on. I mean, if I paid a contractor to fix up my kitchen, and he worked on and finished several other projects after I gave him the money, I would be pissed. But would I really have anything to go on if I just waited for several months before he got back to work on it? SEGA should have really have been riding Gearbox on this.

I know people want to see publishers give more freedom to developers when it comes to games, but, on one hand, you have something like EA's relationship with its devs, and on the other, you have this. Developers should have freedom, but it should still have some freaking oversight. I mean really, what all did SEGA do during that time?

itsthesheppy:
For those of you that played through Bioshock Infinite, look up the 2010 'gameplay footage'on yourtube. Elizabeth commanding the weather and using telekinesis. Entire set pieces that are never seen in the game (like the awesome collapsing bell tower).

Gameplay demos are not to be trusted, ever. Just wait for the game to come out, and then wait for the reviews to flow in.

[I have not played it so let's not go into anything from the game itself.]

There'd be a worthwhile comparison if you could say that their recent gameplay demos weren't indicative of the final product, which I'm inclined to doubt seeing as you had to go back to the very first thing shown from 2 and a half years ago. At that point you're not far off from complaining about a pre-vis demo.

Umm... that's utter bullshit.

Instead of slapping on a "from demo" onto the ads, they should be forced to remove the false ads from public viewing and make ads that are of the actual game.

WanderingFool:

V da Mighty Taco:
*Snip*

Well, if Gearbox took SEGA's money, in over a period of 6 years released, Borderlands, DNF, and a ass load of Brothers in Arms games, then maybe SEGA doesnt really have a foot to stand on. I mean, if I paid a contractor to fix up my kitchen, and he worked on and finished several other projects after I gave him the money, I would be pissed. But would I really have anything to go on if I just waited for several months before he got back to work on it? SEGA should have really have been riding Gearbox on this.

I know people want to see publishers give more freedom to developers when it comes to games, but, on one hand, you have something like EA's relationship with its devs, and on the other, you have this. Developers should have freedom, but it should still have some freaking oversight. I mean really, what all did SEGA do during that time?

I'll give you that - SEGA should have kept a much better eye on this game and Gearbox. Development hells are often born from devs having too much freedom without keeping in mind what is actually feasible.

Still, I wouldn't say SEGA wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court. Game development takes a lot of time - sometimes more than five years on a AAA game, which ACM was. Even though they would have to fight the whole "why weren't you keeping a better eye on the game" issue you brought up, they still would have something to go on with Gearbox constantly taking their money to supposedly work on ACM and insisting that they were working on the game the entire time (something that can easily be argued against). It wouldn't be a cakewalk of a case by any means, but it is there nonetheless.

Well, hopefully everyone learned their lesson and won't give Gearbox freedom anymore.

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

It's not Sega's fault that Gearbox committed fraud to both them and the customers (us). Honestly I hope Sega sues their asses off for what they pulled.

RicoADF:

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

It's not Sega's fault that Gearbox committed fraud to both them and the customers (us). Honestly I hope Sega sues their asses off for what they pulled.

They're just as guilty. It's not the first time they put out a worse version of the game compares to the demo. Remember Sonic '06?

LordLundar:

RicoADF:

DVS BSTrD:
Could you idiots (SEGA) just stick with butchering Sonic from now on?

It's not Sega's fault that Gearbox committed fraud to both them and the customers (us). Honestly I hope Sega sues their asses off for what they pulled.

They're just as guilty. It's not the first time they put out a worse version of the game compares to the demo. Remember Sonic '06?

I don't play Sonic games, my reference for Sega has been Total War series, which has been one excellent game after another. I'll have to take your word for it.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here