It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
You should use joke tags. How would I know you were making a joke and not discussing the topic?Aeander said:It was a joke, not an allegation. No need to get into legalese.Torval said:No. In the software world there is a huge difference. It's not even considered in the same realm. WB and its partner used code directly from Bethesda without permission. On the other hand Bethesda markets to a gaming community that likes to mod games. Making the comparison is false and misrepresents what is happening. This isn't even akin to open source applications receiving code commits from non-team members.Aeander said:If true, shame on WB. The whole thing is kind of ironic though, considering that Bethesda's 1st party games have sold solely off of the work and code of others (modders) for years now.
One is using code in their core app and the other is allowing modifications of ancillary files but not modifying the core code base. Software licensing, what you can attach, and what you can't, and how is covered in the license.
Except PoE does have some predatory monetizing but he's okay with therefore it gets a pass. In fact most people give it a pass because it's F2P so that justifies giving horrible monetization a pass. It's not "p2w" afterall and that's become the only metric of whether monetization is allowed or now (except lootcrates). PoE has variable reward containers (lootcrates). It monetizes game systems like respecs and inventory heavily, not to mention robs the game of cool cosmetics which it bundles packs costing hundreds of dollars.Kyleran said:So the solution is quite simple. Spend money on games like POE which eschew predatory monetary practices, and don't spend anything on badly built or heavily RNG cash shop dependent titles.deadtrack said:Tiller said:I was just going to point out that the OPs account is old, just no posts until now. It's safe to assume they are mad. /shrug. I have no issue with folks venting frustration here over something they are passionate about, just like I don't care what folks spend their money on. Keeps things interesting. I do have a problem when game companies make their game a suck fest for anyone not willing to spend money on things like "loot boxes of gamble your shitty life away", "scraps of bait and switch" , or potion of "DPSPWNWTFiWinbutton" .deadtrack said:Dkompoze said:This guy is really mad. he made an mmorpg account to post this mess. Dont worry about what other people spend their money on, if they wanna pay for something, let them, geeezJoined December 2012I guess this is the type of education people get while Betsy Devos is in charge.These practices all go hand in hand. BDO does everything you stated and much further while POE doesn't do any of it.BDO never needed to use these shady tactics. They have a decent core game. It's just over ran by corrupt business practices that are proven to work because they are effective against a young and naive audience.As opposed to Bless Online which is just repackaging and reselling dirt.
The mistake is thinking legislation is necessary to protect everyone from everything.
One thing that's near impossible to do is protect people from spending their money the way they wish. It's their money after all...
So you taught them thatKyleran said:I protected my children to adulthood and one very good lesson they all learned growing up is....life isn't fair, nor should they ever expect it to be.
2nd lesson, never draw the attention of or get involved in the affairs of government authorities or criminal organizations. (A blurry line sometimes)
This short informative news clip by Mr. Krabs sums it up.blueturtle13 said:Actually it is. This is a f2p game not an EA or Ubisoft paid title. The account creation for this does not allow purchased items from the PSN network to cross over to other platforms per Sony’s terms of service with the vendor. Therefore Epic has no say over this. At all.ShadowStyleB said:
The other problem is that Epic could handle the account thing on their end by simply allowing the user to make another crossplay account so to speak and leave their PSN account separate.
Honestly though everyone has known this since the PS2 and PS3 about how Sony operates so why is it being brought up every time there is a cool new shiny game that everyone is buying into?
This would be in violation of Sony's Playstation policy and would result in Sony pulling the game off Playstation Network.
Remember that Sony has 100% control on which games are listed on the PSN - any company that doesn't play by Sony's rules can simply see their games vanish from the listed game selection.
Actually it isn't. Epic is the only company like this. EA has no problems with this. You can have your EA account on access things from PSN, XBox, and PC but apparently people think that associated accounts are all on Sony when Epic hasn't even tried to do what others have done. Sony doesn't want crossplay on the system but the accounts on Epics website are different.
I have no problems with EA or Ubisoft (despite them not being the best companies) all allow you to access your account on different platforms.
The only question that remains is if Fortnite was unable to be a transferable account between other platforms once tagged as a PSN account why didn’t Epic let fans on the PS4 know that before they created their accounts on PSN?