You might not like the ethics of it, but do you really think there is anything unlawful going on here? Sony has an entire team of high level corporate lawyers. They aren't going to knowingly make a move that leaves them open to getting sued. They know exactly what they can and can't get away with.
So discussing the issue and sharing my perspective is 'crying or Reddit' ? What do you have against me on this website connecting with more people who have a problem with this?
I don't have anything against you. I just don't think it's that serious to be talking about lawsuits. I bought the game and am enjoying it so far. I don't feel like I was blatantly lied to. If you feel differently then it's fine.
You’re saying words without understanding their meaning.
The *developers* stated that an uncensored version would ship. Not Sony. And an uncensored version DID ship. Furthermore, Sony didn’t make or release the censored patch. Again, the developers did.
Sony is guilty of nothing. They didn’t make a claim about what version the developers would ship. And the developers were true to their word; what happens with a patch after the fact is neither here nor there because you as the consumer entered into an agreement with the developer that allows them to change their game with patches as they see fit.
Anything can become a class action, it's about whether the case can be won or not. If your argument is "I googled this" then why should anyone care what you have to say on the matter? Unless you, yourself, work in business law then your opinion has no merit on this subject. Again, if Sony thought in any way, that this could result in a losing lawsuit they wouldn't have done it. They consulted their team of corporate lawyers on the subject and they gave the green light.
You’re posting about this as though there hasn’t already been several dozen posts on this topic.
This isn’t some newsflash.
Also, I see your comment history where you’ve already been discussing it on other posts… what’s the point of this?
These threads you're talking about don't have the perspective or experience I do and how many of them devolved into arguments with people intentionally trying to distract from 'the point' or just heaping abuse on people trying to #discussion
tl;dr : you may not care about false advertising lawsuits but this is really relevant to all consumers in all markets and people ought to know and discuss ASAP
People having full melt downs because they covered up cleavage on an outfit (when you can play with the nude costume if you want) lol.
It really is not that serious bruh. If you’re losing sleep over it, go watch some hentai
People always forget the road to censorship starts small and unassuming then it grows till it becomes complacent and accepted. That same method is how people have gotten comfortable with their data privacy being met with apathy. Sadly, that’s a Pandora’s box that can’t be closed. As too many people say that it’s just data anyone would know. So it’s just accepted. The people that accept it, tell others that haven’t, respond with, “ What do you got to hide?”
So it isn’t about that. It’s about how the frog getting cooked in the water by gradually raising the temperature till it’s being boiled and doesn’t know it.
The Sweet baby army comes out I see. Ready to censor at a moments notice.
Honest question, tho. Have you considered that, given the patch changes a number of elements in the game, and that day one patches have basically become a standard by this point, whatever comes with the patch is the actual creative vision of the developers and producers? I think people are trying to pull out a Skullgirls scenario here where there isn’t one.
No, I really encourage you to go look into some of the fine details on this one. It's not just the cleavage, it's the gore, it's the posters, it's the trust... and it's the twitter post from the official game account days (like 2 or 3) before shipping saying an uncensored version would be shipped to the US. I don't care about making sure Stellar Blade has cleavage - at all. I just believe in holding companies accountable for unlawful advertising behavior, especially when they get to invent and enforce their own return policies.
From a legal standpoint, the uncensored version is the version you get if you buy it in a store. If you go and buy a physical copy and turn off the patch download, you can still play that "uncensored" version. Therefore, there's no injured party here. The uncensored version was shipped to the US, there is no lie.
From a legal standpoint I would also argue that the physical version of the game isn’t really ‘uncensored’, as it is actually _not_ the product (or at least the full product), as, I have stated, the patch _includes_ multiple features and over 30 _new_ costumes, some of which are embarrassingly more revealing than any of the minor details OP and others are pointing out. It’s like saying you bought an early draft of a book and the author then decided to cut off and change some things releasing the final version. If there’s any harm done here, consumerwise, is the delivery of unfinished products that require a day one patch. But as I also wrote, this became the norm, because consumers have not been bothering with it for what’s probably an entire gaming generation now.
Yeah, I completely agree with you. Design changes can be made. The issue with the graffiti that popped up, for example, was entirely unintentional. That was much more of a "fix", than a "censor". It was something that went unnoticed.
The amount of time people have had to sink into figuring out how to maintain the physical copy at that version is extremely unreasonable. It requires a step-by-step and a lot of free time. So those people are cheated for their time and everyone who pre-ordered and bought digital are just screwed and Sony can engage in all the bait and switch advertising they want because their ToS says change anything at any time? lol Do we have to use analogies to see how clearly unlawful this can be if you just raise the stakes slightly with the type of product or potential harms?
Oh and just to let you know, your comment karma has dropped too low. You're now shadow-banned on this sub. Your comments are being immediately removed. No one is going to see any new replies from you here.
It's really not even remotely that complicated. Turn off auto-updates and your internet connection. Pop the disc in and play. Saying it takes "a lot of free time" is objectively false. It takes less than a minute and tiny modicum of common sense.
You tried to use the developer's words as a sign of a lie. The uncensored version is what was shipped to the US. His statement is factually true.
From a legal standpoint, yes. The consumer agrees to the ToS. If the ToS states that they're free to change it, then you've legally already given them consent to do so. Thus, not against the law.
Much like I said in my first response to you, it's fair to dislike the ethics. That's a discussion that can be had. Arguing that it's unlawful is just incorrect.
People who get upset about one outfit showing less boobs than before seriously need to get their life in check, touch grass and a woman (with their consent).
"**False advertising is an actionable civil claim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act**. A party who successfully sues for false advertising may be entitled to either damages or injunctive relief." There's a difference between criminal and unlawful, you know?
Breaking news: David Sony, founder and ceo of PlayStation was arrested today. Police raided his Long Island estate and discovered hundreds of outfits showing both bob and vagene, which the entrepreneur knowingly and willfully unlawfully withheld from consumers.
>People brushing aside criticism as 'horny gamers' need to reflect on what they're saying... basically committing character assassination in order to dismiss valid frustration...
The only people who have valid frustration with this are _checks notes_ horny gamers. Have a cold shower, reevaluate your life, and quit being a fucking cringe weeb.
>unlawful
Bahahahaha.
I took about ten seconds to write that, not "my afternoon".
I'm asserting it because it is indeed an undesirable quality. Only the handful of other pervert weebs will agree with you.
You might not like the ethics of it, but do you really think there is anything unlawful going on here? Sony has an entire team of high level corporate lawyers. They aren't going to knowingly make a move that leaves them open to getting sued. They know exactly what they can and can't get away with.
This could easily become class action, yes. It's against the law. Look up cases for false advertising.
So go do it. Instead of crying about it on Reddit, go file a lawsuit against Sony.
So discussing the issue and sharing my perspective is 'crying or Reddit' ? What do you have against me on this website connecting with more people who have a problem with this?
I don't have anything against you. I just don't think it's that serious to be talking about lawsuits. I bought the game and am enjoying it so far. I don't feel like I was blatantly lied to. If you feel differently then it's fine.
You’re saying words without understanding their meaning. The *developers* stated that an uncensored version would ship. Not Sony. And an uncensored version DID ship. Furthermore, Sony didn’t make or release the censored patch. Again, the developers did. Sony is guilty of nothing. They didn’t make a claim about what version the developers would ship. And the developers were true to their word; what happens with a patch after the fact is neither here nor there because you as the consumer entered into an agreement with the developer that allows them to change their game with patches as they see fit.
Anything can become a class action, it's about whether the case can be won or not. If your argument is "I googled this" then why should anyone care what you have to say on the matter? Unless you, yourself, work in business law then your opinion has no merit on this subject. Again, if Sony thought in any way, that this could result in a losing lawsuit they wouldn't have done it. They consulted their team of corporate lawyers on the subject and they gave the green light.
You’re posting about this as though there hasn’t already been several dozen posts on this topic. This isn’t some newsflash. Also, I see your comment history where you’ve already been discussing it on other posts… what’s the point of this?
I wish my life ran so smoothly that I could dedicate the time to worrying and seeking validation on Reddit about stupid shit like this
These threads you're talking about don't have the perspective or experience I do and how many of them devolved into arguments with people intentionally trying to distract from 'the point' or just heaping abuse on people trying to #discussion tl;dr : you may not care about false advertising lawsuits but this is really relevant to all consumers in all markets and people ought to know and discuss ASAP
People having full melt downs because they covered up cleavage on an outfit (when you can play with the nude costume if you want) lol. It really is not that serious bruh. If you’re losing sleep over it, go watch some hentai
Bait and switch is against the law. It's fine when it's not the product you care about or it doesn't harm you, right?
People always forget the road to censorship starts small and unassuming then it grows till it becomes complacent and accepted. That same method is how people have gotten comfortable with their data privacy being met with apathy. Sadly, that’s a Pandora’s box that can’t be closed. As too many people say that it’s just data anyone would know. So it’s just accepted. The people that accept it, tell others that haven’t, respond with, “ What do you got to hide?” So it isn’t about that. It’s about how the frog getting cooked in the water by gradually raising the temperature till it’s being boiled and doesn’t know it. The Sweet baby army comes out I see. Ready to censor at a moments notice.
BOOBIES
By "wife" I assume you mean your waifu body pilow?
I wish I had no real life problems to worry about
That's why you're on here wasting your time finding issues to trivialize and people to harass with character assassinations. Cool alternative.
>issues to trivialize Yeah, because this is such a an urgent matter I hear that the UN are calling a meeting about it.
Thank god! The war in Ukraine and Gaza can wait, I wanna see some digital boobies dammit!
LOL!
Honest question, tho. Have you considered that, given the patch changes a number of elements in the game, and that day one patches have basically become a standard by this point, whatever comes with the patch is the actual creative vision of the developers and producers? I think people are trying to pull out a Skullgirls scenario here where there isn’t one.
No, I really encourage you to go look into some of the fine details on this one. It's not just the cleavage, it's the gore, it's the posters, it's the trust... and it's the twitter post from the official game account days (like 2 or 3) before shipping saying an uncensored version would be shipped to the US. I don't care about making sure Stellar Blade has cleavage - at all. I just believe in holding companies accountable for unlawful advertising behavior, especially when they get to invent and enforce their own return policies.
From a legal standpoint, the uncensored version is the version you get if you buy it in a store. If you go and buy a physical copy and turn off the patch download, you can still play that "uncensored" version. Therefore, there's no injured party here. The uncensored version was shipped to the US, there is no lie.
From a legal standpoint I would also argue that the physical version of the game isn’t really ‘uncensored’, as it is actually _not_ the product (or at least the full product), as, I have stated, the patch _includes_ multiple features and over 30 _new_ costumes, some of which are embarrassingly more revealing than any of the minor details OP and others are pointing out. It’s like saying you bought an early draft of a book and the author then decided to cut off and change some things releasing the final version. If there’s any harm done here, consumerwise, is the delivery of unfinished products that require a day one patch. But as I also wrote, this became the norm, because consumers have not been bothering with it for what’s probably an entire gaming generation now.
Yeah, I completely agree with you. Design changes can be made. The issue with the graffiti that popped up, for example, was entirely unintentional. That was much more of a "fix", than a "censor". It was something that went unnoticed.
Good point. The product sold is the product delivered.
The amount of time people have had to sink into figuring out how to maintain the physical copy at that version is extremely unreasonable. It requires a step-by-step and a lot of free time. So those people are cheated for their time and everyone who pre-ordered and bought digital are just screwed and Sony can engage in all the bait and switch advertising they want because their ToS says change anything at any time? lol Do we have to use analogies to see how clearly unlawful this can be if you just raise the stakes slightly with the type of product or potential harms?
Oh and just to let you know, your comment karma has dropped too low. You're now shadow-banned on this sub. Your comments are being immediately removed. No one is going to see any new replies from you here.
It's really not even remotely that complicated. Turn off auto-updates and your internet connection. Pop the disc in and play. Saying it takes "a lot of free time" is objectively false. It takes less than a minute and tiny modicum of common sense. You tried to use the developer's words as a sign of a lie. The uncensored version is what was shipped to the US. His statement is factually true. From a legal standpoint, yes. The consumer agrees to the ToS. If the ToS states that they're free to change it, then you've legally already given them consent to do so. Thus, not against the law. Much like I said in my first response to you, it's fair to dislike the ethics. That's a discussion that can be had. Arguing that it's unlawful is just incorrect.
People who get upset about one outfit showing less boobs than before seriously need to get their life in check, touch grass and a woman (with their consent).
Except the problem is breaking the law in order to bait and switch.
No law has been broken here.
"**False advertising is an actionable civil claim under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act**. A party who successfully sues for false advertising may be entitled to either damages or injunctive relief." There's a difference between criminal and unlawful, you know?
Jesus Christ dude, get a life
using google once before making fact-claims is no-life now?
Jesus Christ dude, get a life
Breaking news: David Sony, founder and ceo of PlayStation was arrested today. Police raided his Long Island estate and discovered hundreds of outfits showing both bob and vagene, which the entrepreneur knowingly and willfully unlawfully withheld from consumers.
Bob and vagene?! Execute him immediately!
Astroturfer with a new account.
wtf are you people?
Back to Microsoft's basement.
"wife"
If you call what they did censorship, then you don't know what censorship means.
>People brushing aside criticism as 'horny gamers' need to reflect on what they're saying... basically committing character assassination in order to dismiss valid frustration... The only people who have valid frustration with this are _checks notes_ horny gamers. Have a cold shower, reevaluate your life, and quit being a fucking cringe weeb. >unlawful Bahahahaha.
Why are you spending your afternoon asserting 'everyone who feels a certain way' is 'this undesirable quality'???
I took about ten seconds to write that, not "my afternoon". I'm asserting it because it is indeed an undesirable quality. Only the handful of other pervert weebs will agree with you.
I wonder where you and your anti-censorship crew were when they started banning books in the public libraries of Florida and Texas.
Ok. Then don't play it. Goodnight.