@EpicHats @Ushae @ExtremePhobia Up front? Right, because they talked soo much about the restricted lending, restricted resale, and 24-hour check-in's at their press conference, right? No, they avoided that issue as much as they possibly could, only talking about it when pressed about it in interviews.. and even then, every time one of their PR reps had anything to say, he sounded like a bumbling idiot.
@m4a5 @ScouseLemon Yes, but the only reason that the 'check-in' is there in the first place is because they want to be able to take a cut of the cash from used game sales, when they've already made their money on that copy. Microsoft is simply being greedy, forcing more power over their control of what YOU purchase.
@EpicHats @wdma LOL. It's been proven that Microsoft directly used rival graphics cards, and not only that, but incomparably STRONGER rival graphics cards, to demonstrate their games at E3. Not only that, but there are pictures detailing the PC's within the gaming booths being Hewlett Packard's running Windows 7.
@dujubear Maybe if they didn't embezzle the money from DNF and ACM into the development of other games, these games would've seen proper development. Pitchford is a liar and a thief, period.
@Ripper_TV Why, because they made the majority of the game, handed it over to Gearbox, and haven't seen a dime for it?
As I've said multiple times in this thread, Gearbox assumed a $2.9 million debt from 3DR when they took over on DNF, and as part of the contract between the two, Gearbox wouldn't recoup the cost of the loan from the $2 million in royalties that 3DR was owed. NOW, Gearbox is claiming they don't owe 3DR a dime until the loan has been covered.
Face it, Gearbox tried to steal the game and take credit for it, then it turned out to be a giant flop, and now they're trying to weasel their way out of paying what they're contractually obligated to pay.
@parrot_of_adun @leeko_link And they weren't. Gearbox refuses to pay 3DR's royalties in full due to the $2.9 million debt Gearbox assumed when they took over on DNF, as part of the contract. It didn't make nearly enough money on the game to cover this contract, so now they're basically telling 3DR to go screw themselves, and that they won't give them a dime until the loan has been covered.
But guess what? Gearbox took the debt, and they're legally binded to it.
@drgribb You're misinformed. Gearbox assumed a $2.9 million debt from 3DR when they took over on DNF, on top of the $2 million they owed to 3DR in royalties. 2.9 + 2.0 = 4.9 million. Now, they're unlawfully ignoring their contract, refusing to pay them the royalties they're owed until the loan has been covered.
Yes, if not for Gearbox, the game would've never released. But that doesn't change the fact that 3DR did most of the work, gave the game to Gearbox to touch up and finish, and now Gearbox is claiming they 'saved' 3DR? Give me a break.
What GameSpot fails to mention in this article is that Gearbox assumed a $2.9 MILLION debt that 3DR owed to an unspecified software company, and that it wouldn't recoup the cost of the loan from royalties it'd owe to 3DR from sales of DNF. 3DR even has an e-mail, from Pitchford with a reply saying that this IS the case. Yet now, Gearbox is refusing to pay royalties until that loan is covered, which is contractually unlawful.
But hey, this is GameSpot. Let's leave out important details and make 3DR look as bad as possible, amirite? Journalism at its finest.
They literally said 'the Call of Duty gamer'? I guess that's Capcom's strategy as of late, must've been the driving force behind what completely ruined the Resident Evil franchise.
yearssomuch's comments