Except you would have already purchased the last gen version of the game at this point. As such, that marketing isn't trying to deceive you in any way. It is announcing a new feature and stating a fact.
By burying that unpleasant little detail within the "good news" of being able to transfer your saves. Notice that the whole "we're cutting you old gen folks loose" is only mentioned in the second to last sentence.
ANd that's the first that anyone hears of it too, as far as I know.
By burying that unpleasant little detail within the "good news" of being able to transfer your saves. Notice that the whole "we're cutting you old gen folks loose" is only mentioned in the second to last sentence.
ANd that's the first that anyone hears of it too, as far as I know.
Actually "we're cutting you old gen folks loose" was never explicitly stated. The cut off of patch support after less than 8 months also was not stated either.
The unapologetic indifference, lack of transparency, and abhorent customer service that Bioware showed to last-gen folks is unethical, even though new DLC and patches were never promised.
They have different SKUs, different capabilities (on of them doesn't run on a XB1, for example). I'd say they were.They weren't advertised as such.
They have different SKUs, different capabilities (on of them doesn't run on a XB1, for example). I'd say they were.
Do you thing WB essentially shitting on PC games is OK? Do you thing it's OK for PC gamers to get a buggy port and straight up have no game because of bad coding?
Evidence?
Development cycles don't come out of nowhere. Things need planned, pitched, resources allocated, and so on. They didn't just have a stork fly in and deliver a full-grown copy of The Descent for XB1/PS4/PC.
By burying that unpleasant little detail within the "good news" of being able to transfer your saves. Notice that the whole "we're cutting you old gen folks loose" is only mentioned in the second to last sentence.
ANd that's the first that anyone hears of it too, as far as I know.
Deceptive marketing requires that they be trying to sell you something. Hence the "marketing" portion. They weren't trying to deceive you into purchasing an inferior product because people at this point already have purchased said product. Could their announcement of the last gen drop be better communicated? Certainly. However, it isn't unethical.
Development cycles don't come out of nowhere. Things need planned, pitched, resources allocated, and so on. They didn't just have a stork fly in and deliver a full-grown copy of The Descent for XB1/PS4/PC.
Of course not. Not one said they did. However, do you have evidence that Bioware didn't begin production of Descent for the last gen consoles, at least attempting to make them work, and was then forced to throw in the towel? Even if they made the decision after JoH and switched those resources toward the save transfer system, all you really have here is that they announced it crappily. Which is pretty much par for the course for Bioware and has nothing to do with the ethics of the situation.
For the old consoles, that has already happened.
The 360 and XB1 versions of the game are distinct products.
They weren't advertised as such.
The fact that early access for Jaws of Hakkon was for XBox1 only says otherwise.
Of course not. Not one said they did. However, do you have evidence that Bioware didn't begin production of Descent for the last gen consoles, at least attempting to make them work, and was then forced to throw in the towel? Even if they made the decision after JoH and switched those resources toward the save transfer system, all you really have here is that they announced it crappily. Which is pretty much par for the course for Bioware and has nothing to do with the ethics of the situation.
It has everything to with ethics. Bioware chose to be disingenuous and gloss over the deep-sixing of last gen. They chose to be indifferent to last gen customers. Instead they said "good news" and neglected to mention that all support for last gen was ending.
Are they? What are you talking about?Do you thing WB essentially shitting on PC games is OK? Do you thing it's OK for PC gamers to get a buggy port and straight up have no game because of bad coding?
It has everything to with ethics. Bioware chose to be disingenuous and gloss over the deep-sixing of last gen. They chose to be indifferent to last gen customers. Instead they said "good news" and neglected to mention that all support for last gen was ending.
No, it really doesn't. There was no dishonesty with this announcement. They didn't lie to you or promise something that they didn't deliver. Bioware can end their DLC and patching cycle at any time they wish. They are under no obligation to provide any continued support or content. Nor are they mandated to ensure that any support they do provide is applied equally across all platforms. People who purchased the game purchased just that: the game. They did not purchase DLC access or continued support. Those are bonuses, not expectations nor things you are entitled to receive.
We may all be defining ethical and moral decision making/actions differently. Personally I see nothing unethical or immoral about the decision.
Regardless, people with old gen are angry at the decision made. I get that. So be it.
We may all be defining ethical and moral decision making/actions differently. Personally I see nothing unethical or immoral about the decision.
Regardless, people with old gen are angry at the decision made. I get that. So be it.
It may not be outright immortal or unethical but it's morally questionable if nothing else.
There was no dishonesty with this announcement.
"Half the truth is often a great lie."
Benjamin Franklin
Evidence?
Of course not. Not one said they did. However, do you have evidence that Bioware didn't begin production of Descent for the last gen consoles, at least attempting to make them work, and was then forced to throw in the towel?
If you think this was all done in the few weeks between the announcement and the release of Descent I've got a bridge to sell you. heck the certification by MS and Sony would have taken that time.
If you think this was all done in the few weeks between the announcement and the release of Descent I've got a bridge to sell you. heck the certification by MS and Sony would have taken that time.
I'm sure they've known for a while, but that doesn't mean they didn't try to make Descent work on the older consoles. You might wish for them to be more upfront with bad news like this, but EA is a publicly traded company that has to answer to shareholders. All announcements need to be approved by the marketing or PR teams. However, withholding the information for a month or two doesn't make it unethical. Ethics have nothing to do with this. This is an unfortunate developmental necessity compounded by the crap community relations that have plagued Bioware for years now.
"Half the truth is often a great lie."
Benjamin Franklin
Nice picture/quote combination. Still doesn't make you right though. This is still nothing unethical about this announcement.
I'm sure they've known for a while, but that doesn't mean they didn't try to make Descent work on the older consoles. You might wish for them to be more upfront with bad news like this, but EA is a publicly traded company that has to answer to shareholders. All announcements need to be approved by the marketing or PR teams.
Fair enough, I can see that the fact that EA is a public company could be behind the way it was communicated.
If one understands one's moral or ethical system, one should be able to make these determinations with confidence.It may not be outright immortal or unethical but it's morally questionable if nothing else.
If one understands one's moral or ethical system, one should be able to make these determinations with confidence.
well not many people have their moral/ethical systems entirely planned out and accounting for any situation that may arrive, most people probably aren't capable of it either
I would expect people would think their moral systems were important enough to bother understanding them.well not many people have their moral/ethical systems entirely planned out and accounting for any situation that may arrive, most people probably aren't capable of it either
Could have warned the PS3 and the 360 users about this whole ordeal before they bought the game. It would have been less "scoundrel-like".
You assume Bioware was aware this situation would come about before the initial release of the game. There is no evidence that this is true.
You assume Bioware was aware this situation would come about before the initial release of the game. There is no evidence that this is true.
They did say the Crestwood attack would be in the game 2 days before it was released too. I am sure they were aware of the fact that it wasn't.
Retour en haut