It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
How did you feel when a publisher forced a developer to release a game before it was finished because the dev went over budget and missed milestones?Slapshot1188 said:So you think there should be ZERO accountability for developers that publish a date, take money from customers, have no refund policy, and then push back release dates by YEARS?blamo2000 said:I really don't understand all the anger everyone seems to have towards crowd funding. If it angers you, don't participate.
I bet the same people that get mad when a dev misses a release date would also get out the pitchforks and join the angry mobs when a publisher forced a dev to release a buggy game "early."
I hate when there is no tentative release date for a game. So much so I do not contribute to funding games that don't seem to have even a the ability to make a guesstimate (with a few exceptions). But I don't want them taken to court or sued, or limit other people's ability to freely and openly make a decision to make a funding contribution or not.
I really don't understand why people seem so hellbent on forcing their view on the world and how things should be on others. If a game is asking for crowd funding and doesn't have a project management track record of being able to release a game within a reasonably competent frame of time and budget, just ignore it. Problem solved. Stick to only buying finished products or developers with proven track records of generally being able to release on time and budget - like inXile.
In Troika got back together and crowd funded a game I would throw money at them hand over fist knowing full well their track record. Sometimes the higher risk is worth it for the possible reward. Live and let live and stop trying to force the world and everyone in it to comply with how you think things should be. Freedom to choose always trumps authoritarianism.
It seems like a strange and one-sided way to look at things. These transactions have TWO parties. Both should have some accountability.
Have you ever celebrated mother's day? Father's day? Had a dinner with your SO for Valentine's Day? Worn deodorant?Quizzical said:I have a solution. If you don't like paying for games without knowing when they'll release, then don't.
Then you've fallen prey to the same influences of marketing folks who buy into these EA/Crowdfunding titles have. I've said elsewhere, giving it this reaction is essentially: "I don't feel it affects me directly, so I refuse to give it deeper thought." That's your right, but it makes you poorly qualified to address the issue in general.
The inequity of verifiable and straightforward information between consumers and producer in these instances is an issue.
But that assumes they have a reason for the PII information being tied to the beta client. Are there purchases allowed in-game during the beta? If not, why is any of it tied to the client?You actually left out what might be the crux of it at the beginning of the paragraph you cite. The system cannot provide the privacy as an addition to an already existing system; it must be built from the ground up to include the privacy requirements needed to comply with GDPR. If the system they were using was not built from the ground up to meet the GDPR standards, they would've had to migrate to a new system for storing PII and other consumer information.
Not saying that's it, but that's one way I immediately spotted a problem arising that would take time to correct.
No. Of course not. Why would you have such an irrational and hostile reaction to my simple question?CU undoubtedly stores financial information (Debit/credit cards) as well as the PII needed to verify charges to those cards. Would you rather your card and billing information NOT be subject to privacy rules?blamo2000 said:"They said they could call it beta and put it out but it's not 100% what they promised. They need time to get the crash rate down a pinch and a small amount of polish. They said if they didn't have to do the new euro regulations, they feel they would have hit it".
What regulations? I read through the first page of posts and someone said it was just privacy stuff. If so, did the game have coded-in systems that sold personal information? If not, then couldn't they just not sell private information, or share it? Not doing something shouldn't cause a delay. Not doing something should give them more time logically.
What I'd really like information on is these EU regulations because I am having a hard time understanding this if it really is just protecting privacy rights.