this post was submitted on 13 May 2024
249 points (99.2% liked)

Gaming

19707 readers
543 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 95 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Except Arrowhead isn't some sony-owned subsidiary studio, whose every statement is little more than puppetry.

They are an independently owned company, in a publishing deal with Sony.

By sabotaging the product like this, Sony is straight up stabbing them in the back as a business partner.

Sony can survive botching a game. Arrowhead might not. They're being polite, but if I was at Arrowhead, I would be fucking livid with Sony right now.

Their supposed sponsor, a rich entity with more than enough capital, is literally trying to risk their lunch because it wants even more.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They signed a contract with Sony saying they'd require PSN to play the game. They knew this would be a requirement. It's not like PSN suddenly isn't available worldwide. They were fine with the deal until players got upset and now they want out of the deal to save face.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 36 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

The problem was never the PSN requirement, it was dropping it on people months after launch. No one would be pissed if it had been enforced from day one.

They don't want out, they want sony to wise the fuck up and get with the program.

All I'm saying is, this isn't some planned-in-advance good cop bad cop routine.

Agreeing to terms isn't the same as watching your business partner mismanage the customer base to the point your lunch goes up in flames.

Sony is the publisher. Launching the game in countries that don't even have PSN is 100% on them. Sony is taking action that makes no fucking sense in context, no matter what Arrowhead agreed to.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)
[–] hglman@lemmy.ml 19 points 4 months ago

I think the reason I'm most glad I'm not a lawyer is bc then I would believe that that tiny text is a meaningful gotcha that some how justifies Sony being stupid. No, it wasn't required bc you could play without signing in. Tiny words don't define reality.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 7 points 4 months ago

I know. But that doesn't matter much in the face of how it actually got handled and the community reaction it led to.

[–] homesnatch@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago

There were mixed messages from the beginning.. The FAQ stated that PSN login was optional.

[–] thudge_mcgerk@kbin.social 1 points 4 months ago

The PSN account being mandatory was always a thing. The only reason why it wasn't implemented was technical issues at launch.