IG/Take2 - Class Action

[asmi]

On 5/6/2024 at 4:37 PM, Fizzlebop Smith said:

Once they have put their proposed commitment to EA.. they should be upheld to thay standard.

Regulation is a double-edged sword. We would see MUCH smaller amount of indie games on Steam if their devs would be legally liable to deliver 100% of what they wished. There is a reason we have L.L.C. in most world jurisdictions - far fewer people would be willing to risk everything they own to try out some ideas which may or may not work out, but they collectively lead to technological progress. Since LLC allows enterpreneurs to limit their liabilities to company's assets (as opposed to their own), they have less on the line in case their idea will not work out (assuming no intentional wrong-doing). I think this freedom does us more good than ill all things considered - for example the vast majority of titles I've been playing in the last few years were indie titles developed by small teams or even a single developer, and I'm quite certain most of those devs would not dare listing on Steam should they face legal liability to deliver. What we do need though is to better educate buying public so they would understand what exactly it is they are buying when in comes to EA titles. Specifically, they should only buy a EA title in two situations: 1) you are satisfied with the state of the game as it is at the time of purchase (and so any further development is going to be but a nice bonus to you), or 2) you like the promised features AND you trust the developer to deliver AND you understand that you are taking on a risk that development will stop at some point for some reason (not implying necessarily any ill intent - things happen in life which force drastic changes) AND you are accepting this risk.

And to make my position regarding KSP2 clear - I'm one of those who purchased the game on the first day of EA and I bought it on the case 2 of the above. Of course I'm disappointed with what happened, but this was the risk I took on when handing my money, so I will say some curse words, and then will simply move on with my life. There will be good games in the future for me to play, and there are enough things for me to enjoy beside games.

Edited May 10 by asmi

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, DeadJohn said:

Courts can compel some actions like refunding money.

Regardless, a class action seems unwarranted here. The EA terms IMO were clear that buyers get the present state of the software plus updates (if any). Roadmaps and developer blogs provide their current ideas but are not contractual obligations. Private Division seems to have started EA in good faith and "wasted" more money on the next 14 months of development than they collected from EA.

Note that KSP 2 is still for sale at Steam as early access with the original road map up, just marked the first two as done.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/954850/Kerbal_Space_Program_2/
If development has stopped or will stop after a few months that is an fraud as T2 know the game road map will not be finished.

Yes the road map is not legally binding but I think that having it up after knowing it will not be finished is different. 

[DeadJohn]

7 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Note that KSP 2 is still for sale at Steam as early access with the original road map up, just marked the first two as done.
https://store.steampowered.com/app/954850/Kerbal_Space_Program_2/
If development has stopped or will stop after a few months that is an fraud as T2 know the game road map will not be finished.

Yes the road map is not legally binding but I think that having it up after knowing it will not be finished is different. 

People who buy it today have a good case for a refund, then. People who bought it a year ago do not.

Still, probably not "fraud" but more a case of outdated info that should be corrected. I doubt Take2 has some magic solution to turn KSP2 over to another studio amidst their broader cost cutting. The lack of good clarification from Take2 strongly suggests that the roadmap is dead.

[Devblaze]

@Scarecrow71 15,000 signatures and 10,000 $ retainer - would be to be brought to a larger law firm before they considered taking action. Lawyer said there's a case, but my local law office completely refused to do anything, take 2 apparently has a legal team around the size of 2 law firms. Ofcourse if KSP2 gets canceled then we could go ahead with the lawsuit, but it's not gonna happen.

Was worth getting an opinion tho.

[Scarecrow71]

15 minutes ago, Devblaze said:

@Scarecrow71 15,000 signatures and 10,000 $ retainer - would be to be brought to a larger law firm before they considered taking action. Lawyer said there's a case, but my local law office completely refused to do anything, take 2 apparently has a legal team around the size of 2 law firms. Ofcourse if KSP2 gets canceled then we could go ahead with the lawsuit, but it's not gonna happen.

Was worth getting an opinion tho.

While it is nice knowing there is a case....that retainer is prohibitive.  Eesh.

[bcink]

15 minutes ago, Devblaze said:

@Scarecrow71 15,000 signatures and 10,000 $ retainer - would be to be brought to a larger law firm before they considered taking action. Lawyer said there's a case, but my local law office completely refused to do anything, take 2 apparently has a legal team around the size of 2 law firms. Ofcourse if KSP2 gets canceled then we could go ahead with the lawsuit, but it's not gonna happen.

Was worth getting an opinion tho.

The retainer is not prohibitive. That's nothing. The ongoing costs will tell a very different story. 15k signatures is quite literally half of everyone who bought the EA however. Possible but quite challenging. 

[Superluminaut]

1 hour ago, Devblaze said:

@Scarecrow71 15,000 signatures and 10,000 $ retainer - would be to be brought to a larger law firm before they considered taking action. Lawyer said there's a case, but my local law office completely refused to do anything, take 2 apparently has a legal team around the size of 2 law firms. Ofcourse if KSP2 gets canceled then we could go ahead with the lawsuit, but it's not gonna happen.

Was worth getting an opinion tho.

I would sign.

Also, it turns out the devs have done this before with planetary annihilation.  Showing that this behavior is a pattern changes the case.

[Bej Kerman]

2 hours ago, Scarecrow71 said:

While it is nice knowing there is a case....that retainer is prohibitive.  Eesh.

Perhaps you're overestimating how much 10,000 is worth, it's only a couple months of paychecks which isn't a lot to spill if you want to send a law firm to war against a gaming giant.

[Scarecrow71]

13 hours ago, bcink said:

The retainer is not prohibitive.

Are you going to pay that?  I most certainly am not fronting that kind of cash.  Even if we were to cobble together 15,000 signatures, someone has to pay the retainer.  And although the cost per person would be less than $1 ($0.67 per person, to be precise), how many people do you think are going to put any money towards it?

Ok, so maybe the retainer isn't prohibitive when you start getting down to having, say, 5000 people pitch in $2 each.  Ok, no big deal.  Oh, wait - now there are active ongoing costs for this thing.  Oh, less and less people are going to pony up?  Ok, so some people continue to front cash.  And when the whole thing is over, assuming a win...everyone on the petition wants to get whatever their share is.  Even those who didn't pony up are going to be out there with their hands face up asking for their share.  And that's AFTER the lawyers get paid.

Look, I think a lawsuit is a damned fine idea.  I think consumers have every right to defend themselves from shady business practices, and if it takes a group of people to prove it in court, then I'm all for it.  But someone has to actually pay for this to happen.  And while I do have some cash on hand, I'm not going to front the majority cost.  Especially not if I'm not going to be the face of the case, or if I'm not going to be very involved in the case as a whole.

[bcink]

On 5/9/2024 at 8:52 AM, Scarecrow71 said:

But someone has to actually pay for this to happen.  And while I do have some cash on hand, I'm not going to front the majority cost.  Especially not if I'm not going to be the face of the case, or if I'm not going to be very involved in the case as a whole.

That's what I'm saying. The retainer is not a big deal but the ongoing costs will be another story. I agree that there is probably no one who wants to buck up the kind of money that will be required just out of principle.

[whatsEJstandfor]

 

Edited May 10 by whatsEJstandfor

[m4inbrain]

As much as i'd like to see consumer rights strengthened, objectively this is a pipe dream. 

I don't care about the 50 quid, wouldn't care for the slap on the wrist for T2 either.

What would satisfy me (hate me for it, couldn't care less) if every single person responsible at IG for this trainwreck gets barred from the industry. First and foremost, Nate Simpson. 

[idkgeek]

On 5/13/2024 at 2:25 PM, m4inbrain said:

As much as i'd like to see consumer rights strengthened, objectively this is a pipe dream. 

I don't care about the 50 quid, wouldn't care for the slap on the wrist for T2 either.

What would satisfy me (hate me for it, couldn't care less) if every single person responsible at IG for this trainwreck gets barred from the industry. First and foremost, Nate Simpson. 

How does Nate Simpson have anything to do with it?  It was clearly someone from take 2 looking at numbers in a spreadsheet and seeing an easy cost cut. These are the people who deserve removal from the industry, and heavy fines. Even if it doesn't do much a slap on take 2's wrist is something to hurt them. I just hope that Harvester (original ksp dev) has a chance to take back the ip for his future space game which he plans to make once kit bash is a full game.

Edited May 15 by idkgeek

[Flush Foot]

2 minutes ago, idkgeek said:

How does Nate Simpson have anything to do with it?  It was clearly someone from take 2 looking at numbers in a spreadsheet and seeing an easy cost cut. These are the people who deserve removal from the industry, and heavy fines. Even if it doesn't do much a slap on take 2's wrist is something. 

I think the idea is that while T2 is the one shutting down KSP 2 development*, it was Nate who was constantly 'overstating' the condition of the product we were about to 'receive'.

 

*likely from visible evidence, but "unclear"