Gearbox and Sega sued for false advertising over Aliens: Colonial Marines press demo - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=nnoah95;40495800]ugh this why you shouldnt pre-order games and do some research before buying them, quit trying to blame anyone other than yourself for falling for this crap instead of suing devs you nerds[/QUOTE] no it's both the people who bought this fault and dev's but you are right I don't pre-order games unless I have good gut feeling about it like [b]blood dragon[/b]

Honestly they should've been sued for siphoning funds from Sega into their Borderlands games. False advertising sucks, but it's definitely not as awful as that.

[QUOTE=Jocke;40490112]I want my money back, or change to another game[/QUOTE] If you bought the game on steam you can ask for a refund. Pretty sure steam guarantees one no-questions-asked refund.

[QUOTE=milkandcooki;40496113]Honestly they should've been sued for siphoning funds from Sega into their Borderlands games. False advertising sucks, but it's definitely not as awful as that.[/QUOTE] Seriously, since when have E3 presentations been representative of the final product? Why didn't anyone sue EA with spore then? I would understand sega or whoever suing gearbox for using funds for other means. But false advertisement over an E3 presentation? It's almost as sad as going to BBB over the mass effect 3 ending. You bought into a shitty game. You should learn to actually watch the trailers for it and not buy into hype over the license or theme. You don't need to sue gearbox over a fucking E3 demo. False advertising is WarZ where it blatantly lied on release day about what the game had and didn't have. An E3 presentation being different from the final product isn't.

This isn't going to go very far. All of the videos shown compare the exact same moments in the game and the demo and then complain that they look different. That's not grounds for suing for false advertising by any means. Grounds for suing for false advertising would be something like, if they promised an Aliens franchise game and then gave you a game like Area 51 or something. That is false advertising. Saying you're getting an Aliens game, purposefully making it sound like it is connected to the movie series, and then giving you a game that simply [I]features[/I] some sort of alien. A game looking different than the E3 demo is not false advertising, and is pretty much expected. Also, there were trailers and videos between the demo and it's full release that more accurately portrayed the game, so the whole basis of the complaint is basically moot. I didn't play it, and I likely won't play it, because of how bad it looks, but this lawsuit is rather ridiculous. It's a videogame. Get a refund, don't play other Gearbox/Sega games in protests or something, but suing? That's kind of, well, dumb.

I can only hope the next Alien or Predator related game isn't awful, hell the fact this game doesn't have dedicated servers is just putting a plant on top of the grave

At the absolute LEAST, they blatantly misrepresented the product by showing video and screenshots that looked nothing like the game that actually shipped. The publisher and developer's behavior is suspect as well, Pitchford and Gearbox have been extremely defensive against any criticism of the game, and a press embargo usually means a publisher has something to hide from consumers, in this case, a huge discrepancy in quality from what they were led to expect the game would be like. But yes, there is very little chance this suit will go anywhere. False advertisement is what WarZ was (I still can't believe the game hasn't been totally pulled from Steam yet). The best course of action for people who got burned by this game is to obtain a refund (go to your bank and force a chargeback if they refuse to take the game back), and boycott Gearbox by not buying any of their future titles.

[QUOTE=27X;40495742]Nope. They knew the game was awful 6 months before cert, and they are the ones who ordered the review embargo. There are no good guys here save for the contract people like the ones at Polycount and CGSociety who put in hard work for a crap product. SEGA fired the guy who bought the Aliens license in the first place, and was going to cancel the in 2008 to begin with. They knew exactly what consumers were getting, just like they knew their other licensed games like Iron man, Thor and Hulk were crap. SEGA is just as guilty as GBX and Timegate.[/QUOTE] Why would a publisher throw a product to the side they invested in? This was Sega trying to recoup loses from being decieved.