Starcraft: Ghost Lives On... Kinda

[Gahars]

Before we get into that, I'm also wary of the "Something promised in development isn't in the game so therefore we were deceived!" argument.

Sometimes shit happens. Sometimes mechanics don't work. Sometimes you have to cut things out to meet a deadline. Sometimes mechanics just aren't fun in practice. Who knows? Anything can happen between development and shipping.

Do developers over promise at times? Of course (coughcoughPeterMolyneuxcoughcough). However, I think holding developers to statements made in the midst of the development process (to this extent, at least) is hardly fair or reasonable.

I don't know, just a thought.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

ITT I don't like the game so it's a scam.

Gaming has the most self entitled userbase that only they could consider not liking something a "scam". I paid $15 to see The Last Airbender in theaters. Fifteen fucking dollars. And was that a scam? Can I go back and get my money? No, I cannot.

 

[DiabloStorm]

So you're saying that they advertised the product (as in, commercials, direct statements during sales, and then sold a product that did not have what was advertised?

I'm interested. Give me a list.

• A
• list
• of
• items,
• bbcode
• optional

You know, to make sorting out quantifiable facts easy for the discussion.

Okay, firstly, you act as if their statements/commercials/whatever are only valid while actual sales are happening at that specific point in time. So basically, they could promise the world as long as it isn't "during sales" and not follow up and everything would be peachy? Lol that's not how they marketed this to us. You're trying to turn this into a debate over legality and the legal definition of "scam." Anyway, it started before sales, during preorders, and after release (to a lesser extent)
Instead, how about I ask you why both you and Gahars attribute success directly to amount of sales? The tobacco company thing fits quite well still.

 

[Gahars]

Okay, firstly, you act as if their statements/commercials/whatever are only valid while actual sales are happening at that specific point in time. So basically, they could promise the world as long as it isn't "during sales" and not follow up and everything would be peachy? Lol that's not how they marketed this to us. You're trying to turn this into a debate over legality and the legal definition of "scam." Anyway, it started before sales, during preorders, and after release (to a lesser extent)
Instead, how about I ask you why both you and Gahars attribute success directly to amount of sales? The tobacco company thing fits quite well still.

I like how you couldn't provide the list.

10/10 would try to change topic again

 

[DiabloStorm]

Before we get into that, I'm also wary of the "Something promised in development isn't in the game so therefore we were deceived!" argument.

Sometimes shit happens. Sometimes mechanics don't work. Sometimes you have to cut things out to meet a deadline. Sometimes mechanics just aren't fun in practice. Who knows? Anything can happen between development and shipping.

Do developers over promise at times? Of course (coughcoughPeterMolyneuxcoughcough). However, I think holding developers to statements made in the midst of the development process (to this extent, at least) is hardly fair or reasonable.

I don't know, just a thought.

They were very meticulous with their video/blog updates with this game, honestly I wish they would have just stfu and not talk so much, not name it "Diablo" at all, call it something else and that would fix 90% of their problems.

I like how you couldn't provide the list.

10/10 would try to change topic again

Go to the link I made, there's your list. I'm not doing that again.

 

[Rydian]

Okay, firstly, you act as if their statements/commercials/whatever are only valid while actual sales are happening at that specific point in time.

Well, that's because that's how it is.

Let's say that on Monday, I tell you "Hey, later I'll bring in this machine that shoots rainbows, and I'll sell it to you."
Then a few days later, I say "Hey, I brought a machine and it shoots out red and blue. Do you want to buy it?"

If you buy it, you bought a device that shoots red and blue, like I told you when actually presenting it.

If you've never seen situations where a product actually comes out with less features than promised... are you like 3 days old or something?

So basically, they could promise the world as long as it isn't "during sales" and not follow up and everything would be peachy?

As long as they're not actually advertising something that they're not selling, what's the problem?

Disappointment isn't illegal.

Lol that's not how they marketed this to us. You're trying to turn this into a debate over legality and the legal definition of "scam."

That's because that's what the definition is.

If you don't want this to be about legalities, then don't use legal words like "scam".

Instead, how about I ask you why both you and Gahars attribute success directly to amount of sales? The tobacco company thing fits quite well still.

What does that have to do with anything? The other user said the product was a failure. In order for a product to be a failure, it generally has to produce a net loss or go without any appreciation despite hard effort.

Diablo III fits none of those. It has some of the biggest sales of all time, and is a game almost everybody who plays videogames has at least heard of.




I've never played the game and don't intend to, by the way. I just don't like people accusing companies of doing legal scams just because they're butthurt that a product didn't come out the way THEY wanted it to.

 

[Gahars]

They were very meticulous with their video/blog updates with this game, honestly I wish they would have just stfu and not talk so much, not name it "Diablo" at all, call it something else and that would fix 90% of their problems.

So the major problem here was your perception of the game and not the game itself?

Go to the link I made, there's your list. I'm not doing that again.

AKA the SJW staple: "It's not my job to educate you!"

Gotcha.

 

[DiabloStorm]

So the major problem here was your perception of the game and not the game itself?
Gotcha.

Haha, no. If only it was that easy... the game still blows, it just wouldn't have so many Diablo veterans pissed off. As I said, they used the popularity of Diablo 1 and 2 as leverage for their sales.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Haha, no. If only it was that easy... the game still blows, it just wouldn't have so many Diablo veterans pissed off. As I said, they used the popularity of Diablo 1 and 2 as leverage for their sales.

Still "I don't like the game" is not a basis for accusations of fraud. That's our point.

You're entitled to opinions, not a misunderstanding of the English language.

 

[DiabloStorm]

My responses in bold

Well, that's because that's how it is.

Let's say that on Monday, I tell you "Hey, later I'll bring in this machine that shoots rainbows, and I'll sell it to you." Okay. *hypothetical want for such item and sends money for preorder*
Then a few days later, I say "Hey, I brought a machine and it shoots out red and blue. Do you want to buy it?" Except that it was a preorder, based off the information you provided me so the purchase was already made, your hypothetical situation of buying it at this point doesn't fit at all. >>>Scam.

If you buy it, you bought a device that shoots red and blue, like I told you when actually presenting it.

If you've never seen situations where a product actually comes out with less features than promised... are you like 3 days old or something?

As long as they're not actually advertising something that they're not selling, what's the problem?

Disappointment isn't illegal.

That's because that's what the definition is.

If you don't want this to be about legalities, then don't use legal words like "scam". Okay, so for you, the law is infallible and there are no such things as loopholes. The world is black and white.

What does that have to do with anything? The other user said the product was a failure. In order for a product to be a failure, it generally has to produce a net loss or go without any appreciation despite hard effort. Tobacco companies.

Diablo III fits none of those. It has some of the biggest sales of all time, and is a game almost everybody who plays videogames has at least heard of.

Again, sales really don't mean as much as you think they do... it's not Black/White companies have other things to worry about too, like their reputation. (Although admittedly tobacco companies don't fit the whole reputation thing, but they have addictive nicotine to fix that.)


i've never played the game and don't intend to, by the way. I just don't like people accusing companies of doing legal scams just because they're butthurt that a product didn't come out the way THEY wanted it to. Okay, so for you, the law is infallible and there are no such things as loopholes. The world is black and white.

Still "I don't like the game" is not a basis for accusations of fraud. That's our point.

You're entitled to opinions, not a misunderstanding of the English language.

If I wanted to waste even more time on Blizzard and I wanted to find out if "scam" held up in court I would, but it may or may not. But I really don't care, I just don't buy anything from them anymore so I wouldn't waste my time to find out, either way many people feel deceived of their money based directly off of what they were told they'd be purchasing. Whether it's a criminal offense or not in the eyes of the law doesn't really matter, the law isn't infallible.

 

[p1ngpong]

I came into this thread expecting to see a discussion about starcraft ghost possibly being released.

Instead I see it is a retarded little argument over absolutely fucking nothing with extra bullshit sprinkled on top.

Yes, this thread defines the word "scam" perfectly.

Thank you GBAtemp.

 

[Rydian]

>Preorder
That's the place you preordered it from, not Blizzard. Blizzard starts selling to people and places well after preorders. A preorder is between you and the store you do it at, Blizzard is not actually involved (which is why preorder prices and details vary).

>Loopholes
Yeah, no. You accused them of a scam. What if we replaced the word "scam" with "assault" in a situation? Would it be fair to say somebody "assaulted" me when they really just gave me a mean look? It doesn't matter how much I try to bend words and go "oh definitions don't fit what I want so they don't matter", the words being used to not describe the actual situation.

>Tobacco companies.
I asked you what that has to do with anything. Tobacco is not a failure. It's one of the highest grossing product categories on the planet, and is a hobby undertaken by many. Again, you're confusing "scam" with "shit I don't like".

>lol sales don't mean much
When talking about whether a product is a failure or not... it's pretty much purely sales versus costs. I mean saying "sales don't matter much" when talking about whether a product failed or not is like saying "whether I came doesn't matter much" when trying to tell somebody if sex was good for you or not.

>Law is black and white?
I already linked and quoted you the definitions of the word you're using improperly. Stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[p1ngpong]

Closed btw.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

If I wanted to waste even more time on Blizzard and I wanted to find out if "scam" held up in court I would, but it may or may not. But I really don't care, I just don't buy anything from them anymore so I wouldn't waste my time to find out, either way many people feel deceived of their money based directly off of what they were told they'd be purchasing. Whether it's a criminal offense or not in the eyes of the law doesn't really matter, the law isn't infallible.

Scams can be held up in court when it's like a Ponzi Scheme. Not when it's whiny customers complaining that they didn't like the game.