It's not native 1080p.Did you not see my part where I say I've directly played the game and it looked like every other 1080p AAA title I've come across?
The product seems to actually do "this" and "that", and not just "that". That's my problem.
The game isn't unplayable, the game runs fine and it looks like it should. The guy could have setting errors or just a bad set, who knows?
The problem is Sony isn't lying about it. It not coming in "native" 1080p doesn't mean its not a 1080.
It either runs at 1280x1080, or 1920x1080. Certain parts have different specs, but no, it still runs at 1080.
It being Native means just that, its not scaled by system. Some games run at 1028x720, but the system runs them at 1080p.
This is one such game, it has 1080p capability should your system and set have the means to provide it.
Unless the definition of native graphics has changed since 2005... This guy is complaining because the game runs at 1080p, but isn't made to only run at 1080p.
But its not entirely false. Its a matter of preference, but 1080p boosted and 1080i boosted look so similar to their native counterparts that you couldn't tell the difference.It's not native 1080p.
Sony's biggest selling point is how much "better" games run on their console, and it turns out to be slightly false, they should own up to it.
The guy is really pushing it in the suit, though.
Your math doesn't account for retailer and distributor profits. I don't know about distributor but I know retailer is around 5-10$ markup usually. They don't make that much on new releases (the margins are better on used).5 million is between 1/6 and 1/20 of the budget of a small triple A title. It really isn't that much for a big gaming company especially if they've sold more than a million copies. 3 million copies sold at 60$ is 180 million profit. Maybe they should've asked for a little less but I would not ask for less than a million.![]()
QFTTIt's not native 1080p.
Sony's biggest selling point is how much "better" games run on their console, and it turns out to be slightly false, they should own up to it.
The guy is really pushing it in the suit, though.
I've been saying this for years. If you bring legal action in regards to something fucking retarded like this, you should have to pay for the defense's legal fees, should you lose the case. It would avoid a lot of this kind of thing. It's like that fat piece of trash who fell asleep at a Yankee game this season and claims he was ridiculed on camera and sued for millions. Get a fucking job and you won't need to file a frivolous lawsuit to fund your Cool Ranch Dorito and Baja Blast addiction.They really need a penalty for when you lose a stupid ass case like this. Y'know, that way people are less inclined to even attempt it.
Seriously, who fucking cares if it wasn't at the resolution they said it would be in? Then suing for $5 million? REALLY? It's an obvious cash grab attempt.
Praise on brother!!!! I was thinking the same thing last night when I saw this topic. I do feel 5mil is a huge stretch, but I have to agree the game industry has been getting away with really scummy shit over the last few years and it mainly due to consumers accepting BS, bold face lies from the company, and the lack of proper legislation to monitor and regulate the way digital content is produced, sold, and distributed.I don't see what's so funny about it. I mean if they promised 1080p (as in used high res to promote the game/mode) and didn't deliver that's false advertising and it's about time that consumers do something about it.
I hope he wins this case and more people sue game companies for lying to players' faces. They need to stop this trend of showing pretty things you aren't really getting. Like severly toning down the graphics, promising exciting modes and features that end up being not even 1% of what was promised etc.
It's an annoying trend and it's becoming a real issue in the video game industry tbh. There needs to be a deterrent otherwise companies can just get away with any lie to sell their half assed product.
That's something neither of us would focus on but everybody plays games for different reasons. Because of that, the suing over a mislabeled resolution is the same to me as suing over a third of the game you were promised. It's all subjective I guess.I guess my main gripe with this is he's bitching about a multiplayer resolution when that's not what someone should bother focusing on while playing.
Yeah, I suppose it is. I'm sure we'll see more about it as it either A) develops or B) gets thrown out.That's something neither of us would focus on but everybody plays games for different reasons. Because of that, the suing over a mislabeled resolution is the same to me as suing over a third of the game you were promised. It's all subjective I guess.
Usually you just go back to the store and ask the money back you paid for the game lolBut what makes you think the guy deserves a million dollars, much less $5 million for this? What did he lose? Nothing other than prettier graphics which in no way impact how the game plays. Was he harmed in any way? No. Was he lied to? Sure, it would seem that way. But if he truly wanted to experience real 1080p and it means that much to him, he should know to be a PC gamer to achieve that and not rely on consoles.
I don't agree with being lied to about anything, regardless of how trivial it is. But suing for an absurd amount of money over something like this is just that: absurd.
I don't think it will uphold in court at all simply due to the amount that he's asking for. The main thing I would question is where he got that amount from and exactly why he feels he's entitled to that amount due to being lied to about a video game's resolution.
This guy.Usually you just go back to the store and ask the money back you paid for the game lol
God i would be so fing rich.......I wanna sue players online who use wireless online instead of wired to play injustice and then complain it isn't good
10 million dollars
@WoundCowboy