It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Citation needed.Durzax said:Ah, yes, the lets complain about the non-answers of a game developer. By an industry that has a history of non-answers when a game is in development.
rpmcmurphy said:MaxBacon said:
I don't care what you think, I stand my opinion relating to this specific person as I posted before.
If you don't care what I or others think why do you spend so much time trying to tell people they're wrong and/or defending your opinion?
That makes zero sense.
Ozmodan said:As soon as you said side scrolling I stopped reading. In this day and age, doing any side scrolling game is just ridiculous.
This case isn't some dinky forum war. Crytek is under no obligation whatsoever to pander to the forum peanut gallery. The qualifications for a legal case to be dismissed are much higher and harder to get than the qualifications for a case to go to court.Phry said:Cryteks response by the same token didn't address most of the reasons why the case should be dismissed either, so without that 'document' the existence of which is entirely questionable, its hard to see how dismissing the case out of hand is not the most likely outcome, the judge after all isn't interested in what might be, but what is, and given facts presented so far, i don't really fancy Cryteks chances, Crytek is fast becoming a laughing stock tbh that hole they are in is only getting deeper.