KILLZONE Shadow Fall [PS4]

[fearsomepirate]

It's just incredibly obnoxious the way they made it nearly impossible to do anything if you don't have a jetpack and take the high ground. I also really disliked how every single class could set proximity mines. I think my hatred of that one map pretty much overwhelmed my ability to enjoy the game, because it seems to constantly come up in rotation.

There's also the issue with some of the classes being incredibly weak until you leveled them up, and the Scout's jamming ability being passive. Too much lack of thinking about balance in that game.

I'm playing it now, though. I'm actually enjoying it when I'm not playing on Turbine. Maybe I should have played it more instead of Black Ops or whichever COD it was.

 

[patsu]

It's somewhat hard to characterize that game. I remember thinking it's a "hardworking" or busy game. I (or everyone) needed to put in a lot of hardwork to pull the team forward.

Every moment, I was thinking what else I could do to stay ahead of the game. It's because everyone has "superpower". Sometimes, they use their special abilities to block your path; sometimes they use cloaking or disguise or just pure speed to sneak into your objective room; sometimes, they hide in one corner; other times, they chose to die in your objective room and revive right there, etc.

I also needed to think about what the opponents were planning. It's not uncommon for the experienced players to give up this round to lay the groundwork for the next round. A hard earned round could be marginalized by a quick loss next round. e.g., I had an enemy sniper sneak into one of our hideouts before the assassination round. When our guy got there to stay out of sight, he walked right into the cloaked sniper. It happened just seconds after the round started.

Every time I died, I chose the best class for that situation to revive. So it's like a shapeshifter game. But it can also feel like chores if you die too much.

Most vocal gaffers hated the game. But there is a small Gaf following. It was fun hunting Gaffers down in assassin round, or when attacking/defending objectives against other Gaffers. These folks usually know what they are doing. And they will keep coming back for a good fight. I had a few very close rounds where victory was decided at the last second, or the last punch (Both ran out of ammo).

 

[fearsomepirate]

Last night, I had several games where I was the deciding force. At the apex of my skill in KZ2, I was doing that all the time. It was kind of a rush. The MAWLR graveyard and Bilgarsk Blvd are solid maps. Those two and Turbine Concourse seem to be the only ones that come up frequently. Yet at the same time, when that happens, it discourages me from playing another round, because I know my team isn't pulling its weight!

I got this game on Day 1, and I just never found a group to play it regularly with. I think that's another reason I quit and why I'm still playing the first Black Ops. Running a game of Domination with the same guys every night is more fun to me than destroying a Warzone with my mic muted.

 

[HTupolev]

Hmm.

http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/6/5975983/sony-sued-killzone-shadow-fall-1080p

 

[DieH@rd]

Desperate times demand desperate measures.

So stupid.

 

[zed]

Its a valid complaint, hopefully they'll win, which will discourage others from releasing bogus info. though the single player is proper 1080p so I'ld expect they'll say that

Of course the major can of worms is, FPS, how many advertised as 30 or 60 fps games achieve that regulary i.e. > 99.9% of the time, less than half I warrant

 

[hesido]

We had already discussed the technique, but I forgot the general consensus here. I'll say that it is not false advertising.

 

[Sigfried1977]

What's next? Suing Respawn for not delivering a constant 60 fps in Titanfall? Dumb fucks.

 

[Phil]

IMO there is no such thing as native resolution in the sense the lawsuit is arguing, unless everything that is rendered (from any HUD elements down to rendered shadows) do not result in pixelated renders bigger than the end resolution.

What KZ:SF did was brilliant. You still end up with a unique 1080p frame at the end of each 1/60th so that pretty much fits the definition of native 1080p in my book. If this proposed method isn't native 1080p, then any game that introduces tearing by definition isn't native 1080p either (because the full frame isn't drawn in time). It's a ridiculous argument all together.

If I were on the defence counsel, I'd bring up a screen and check if the "victim" is even able to distinguish the single player 1080p renders from the multiplayer ones.

 

[Sigfried1977]

By the way, doesn't 1080p refer to horizontal lines only (whereas 1920x1080 would have to be refered to as "FullHD")? In that case his "claim" would have to be dismissed right away.

 

[orangpelupa]

i do think the law suit is ridiculous but i wish publisher start giving more truth before the game released.
and i also think KZ's case is not a big deal at all compared to other games that completely misleading their customer: Alien something something, Forza 5 environment and human, games from 90's that show videos as screenshot on behind box

 

[Shifty Geezer]

IMO there is no such thing as native resolution in the sense the lawsuit is arguing, unless everything that is rendered (from any HUD elements down to rendered shadows) do no result in pixelated renders bigger than the end resolution.

Absolutely! Textures are upscaled. Particles are upscaled. Other buffers are upscaled. This guy's just after cash. He's entitled to a refund at best if the game wasn't as advertised, but how a 1080p image is constructed varies from game to game.

If I were on the defence counsel, I'd bring up a screen and check if the "victim" is even able to distinguish the single player 1080p renders from the multiplayer ones.

That. And also see if he's played any multiplayer. If he's played the game after EG's 'exposé', it shows it doesn't really affect the game experience.

Give Sony a slap on the wrist for being a bit loose with description perhaps, but it's hardly $5 million penalty worthy. And it wasn't even misleading when you review GG's blog on the subject.

http://www.killzone.com/en_GB/blog/news/2014-03-06_regarding-killzone-shadow-fall-and-1080p.html

I'm also not sure if the packaging claimed 1080p rendering as the plaintiff states. On the EU boxart it says 1080p output. Can't find a large enough US photo to read.

 

[Brad Grenz]

It says output in the US, too. Given he didn't buy the game until May of this year, months after Guerrilla disclosed the reprojection technique and the fact that the Law firm involved has started multiple class action suits against game companies, I think it's pretty clear the plaintiff bought the game for the express purpose of filing suit. Either on his own initiative or at the direction of the law firm.

In any case the claim is without merit. The game provides a full 1080p buffer each frame in all modes. To find Sony at fault you would have to define "native" so narrowly no game would qualify, and since Sony never actually advertised the multiplayer as having "opaque geometry rasterized at 1920x1080 pixels" they haven't lied about anything.

 

[Scott_Arm]

The lawsuit is total bullshit. For one, I'm pretty sure the boxes are only labelled as 1080p in a way to let you know they can be displayed on a 1080p television, not to go into any depth about render targets.

Another point, this checklist mentality is nonsense. Fuck it. I'm going to sue the next time a game has intermediate render targets that are not 1080p. Particles rendered at 1/4 resolution? Fuck you, I'm suing.

 

[SlimJim]

SlimJim: "Hi Supreme Court, my name is SlimJim and I speak here today on behalf of Sony.
1080P refers to the vertical resolution, which should mean 1080 individual lines. The P stands for progressive; every single time these 1080 individual lines should be sent at the same time. This is what's happening in this game.
The specification doesn't require a specific horizontal resolution.
As my witness I call to the stand mister Henry Dick Mason Isaac, you might know him from the spec which he developed and named after himself. Mister HD Mason-Isaac, is what I say true?"

Mason-Isaac: "yes, it's true, although the 1920 horizontal resolution is often implied; it is not required."

SlimJim: "no further questions"

Supreme Court: "I see.. Well the so called 'customer' was only in it for the money it seems. I sentence the customer to play 200 hours of Call of Duty:Ghosts...

..on an actual Xbox One"

That's how it should happen

 

[L. Scofield]

Of course if the lawsuit fails we'll see more blatant lies from developers.

 

[Cjail]

What KZ:SF did was brilliant.

Have you played Shadow Fall MP?
I have and I can tell you it was far from satisfactory.

If I were on the defence counsel, I'd bring up a screen and check if the "victim" is even able to distinguish the single player 1080p renders from the multiplayer ones.

Easily objectionable and totally irrelevant since all that matters is whether or not Sony lied to customers and misled them.
The victim can be unaware of being the object of a crime but it doesn't make the crime less real.

And also see if he's played any multiplayer. If he's played the game after EG's 'exposé', it shows it doesn't really affect the game experience.

This would be totally irrelevant as well.
This lawsuit it's not about "I have not enjoyed the game" it's about "I have been deceived into purchasing the video game under false pretenses".
This argument might good for forum debate about "perceived quality" but not in a lawsuit for false advertisement.
You would need to prove that Sony didn't lie to customers not that game was enjoyable anyway because that's totally subjective.

Give Sony a slap on the wrist for being a bit loose with description perhaps, but it's hardly $5 million penalty worthy. And it wasn't even misleading when you review GG's blog on the subject.

That blog come after the release an so it can be used against Sony easily to "prove" that they did hide vital information to the customer until the opportune moment.
Whether the $5m penalty is appropriate or not its up to the court to decide.

I'm also not sure if the packaging claimed 1080p rendering as the plaintiff states. On the EU boxart it says 1080p output. Can't find a large enough US photo to read.

This is the only argument that IMO would have some actual validity in a courthouse.
If the product description was accurate and clear then there most likely the court will conclude that here was no true false advertisement.
Sony might have have exaggerated their claims but ultimately they did not lie to the customers.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This would be totally irrelevant as well.
This lawsuit it's not about "I have not enjoyed the game" it's about "I have been deceived into purchasing the video game under false pretenses".

He said that if he had known it wasn't 1080p, he wouldn't have bought it. The implication is that a non pure 1920x1080 game damages that game experience. If this was the case and the game was ruined, he wouldn't have gotten any entertainment from it. As it stands, if he's played the game, he's saying, "This game wasn't 1080p. I've had lots of fun playing it. Now I want lots compensation."

That undermines the principle of his claim for compensation. What exactly would the guy be compensated for?

This argument might good for forum debate about "perceived quality" but not in a lawsuit for false advertisement.

Lawsuits for false advertising shouldn't happen on the whole, because there are advertising authorities and consumer rights. It doesn't need a big ol' court-case. Well, that might be the only option in the US which prefers litigation to any other form of resolution.

You would need to prove that Sony didn't lie to customers not that game was enjoyable anyway because that's totally subjective.

If that's all there was to it, the plaintiff would only raise one point in his argument - one quote of KZ:SF being 1080p native and one link to DF's analysis and subsequent blog showing it wasn't 1080p. In addition to the facts of the issue, the material damage is quantified in terms of impact and that affects how much the court would deem worth the compensation or fines.

So there's two parts to this. Did Sony mislead people, and what's the material impact of that? The former will need clarification on what exactly Sony communicated and what the interpretation of very specifications is. The latter will need evidence showing how owners have suffered.

 

[orangpelupa]

but the interpretation of "misled" also different from one person to another.
Promoting video game with bullshot seems considered okay. No company has been subjected to lawsuit because bullshot.

 

[Shortbread]

Hmm.

http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/6/5975983/sony-sued-killzone-shadow-fall-1080p

What’s next?
- XB1 user suing MS for not delivering on the promise of Kinect and the games to support it?
- PS4 users suing Sony for not supporting EA access?
- PC gamers suing game developers for purposely pairing down graphics *cough* Watch Dogs *cough* to match the console version?
- Wii U user suing UBIsoft and EA for taunting them of all the games to come?