PC Why are TFP still selling 7d2d on consoles?

[Ralco]

You are jumping to conclusions here. While I agree with you that the store should be updated to include a disclaimer, there are lots of possibilities why this wasn't done yet.

They first had to inform and prove to MS that they are now the owner. So MS updated that name on store front, but that still doesn't mean TFP has access. So after getting informed by MS that they are now accredited as publisher, they would have to contact their service to get an access password before they can do anything or maybe go through MS press departement who is in charge of the store texts.

* So it is possible that the information from MS back to TFP that they are owner now got lost.

* It is possible that the one at TFP having to do the edits pushed it back because he has lots of other work on his table.

* It is possible that he couldn't get a password from their service section yet.

* It is possible that they decided the store front needs some more changes than just the disclaimer and are in the middle of producing that.

* It is possible that they are still waiting for Sony to accredit them as well, since I don't see a change on Sony's (german) website

* It is very probable that that simple line to add has to be translated into all the languages of the MS store. Whether that has to be done by the publisher (which means hiring a company for this one single text line!!) or an internal department of MS I don't know. Is someone here who knows first hand?

* And then there is the possibility that they don't want to do this, as you claim.

So it would at least be more sensible to ask first what's the holdup before going straight to the accusations.

I did say it makes me wonder why it wasn't updated, however proving you own the rights isnt a half-year process, nor is translation, both sony and Microsoft are multinational corporations they have translators on their payroll. You accuse me of jumping to conclusions which I haven't I merely stated the fact that failure to disclose this information is in fact a consumer rights violation (in america I am unclear of the laws in other countries) meanwhile you make nothing but conjecture on behalf of a company that has shown no effort to behave in a consumer friendly way towards its console base at this point we are able to assume its because they dont care perhaps not in a malicious form but intent is irrelevant when in violation of the law I can go check the sony store (USA) and see if it's been updated I failed to do so prior to informing roland of the change on microsoft. I have yet to jump to conclusions I have yet to assign intent and I have yet to see and effort to correct their course so I will call it as I see it and the way I see it is they made enough effort to make sure they now get a larger cut of sales while also not making sure players are aware of the state of the game. 

Just checked the playstation store, it hasn't been updated from what I see. Telltale is still listed, thebpalystation storefronts are a mess to read. 

 

[meganoth]

I did say it makes me wonder why it wasn't updated, however proving you own the rights isnt a half-year process, nor is translation, both sony and Microsoft are multinational corporations they have translators on their payroll. You accuse me of jumping to conclusions which I haven't I merely stated the fact that failure to disclose this information is in fact a consumer rights violation (in america I am unclear of the laws in other countries) meanwhile you make nothing but conjecture on behalf of a company that has shown no effort to behave in a consumer friendly way towards its console base at this point we are able to assume its because they dont care perhaps not in a malicious form but intent is irrelevant when in violation of the law I can go check the sony store (USA) and see if it's been updated I failed to do so prior to informing roland of the change on microsoft. I have yet to jump to conclusions I have yet to assign intent and I have yet to see and effort to correct their course so I will call it as I see it and the way I see it is they made enough effort to make sure they now get a larger cut of sales while also not making sure players are aware of the state of the game. 

Just checked the playstation store, it hasn't been updated from what I see. Telltale is still listed, thebpalystation storefronts are a mess to read. 

"making no effort to disclose that the state of the console versions are as they are that is borderline consumer rights violations no matter what anyone here says" reads like an accusation,

"why they dont feel it's necessary to disclose this information to potential customers" is an accusation

"not making even the slightest effort to update that store front with needed information" is definitely an accusation

All of above seem to me stated as facts, no "if" to be seen anywhere.

I agree that changing the store fronts seems not to be top priority for them, merely an afterthought. In fact it was Roland a week or two ago who seems to have reminded them that there was still unfinished bussiness with the console stores. Now I'm counting only from that point, because I'm sure nobody at TFP had any thought for meddling in any way with MS or Sony once it was clear there was going to be no update. The change to the xbox store is obviously a direct result of the reminder by Roland.

While I think adding a disclaimer to the store front would be the right thing to do I also think it isn't really the most important thing to do. Any adult consumer should know that he needs to read reviews of any game for their platform because there are always smaller or bigger changes. There is a long list of console games with atrocious PC ports. The number of people still doing an uninformed buy of 7D2D should be relatively low.

Consumer rights have to do with what a company promises about a product, not what youtube promises. I don't think there is any violation of the law.

--------------------------

PS: please use periods and paragraphs for your posts. It really isn't easy to read and understand your posts.

 

[Ralco]

"making no effort to disclose that the state of the console versions are as they are that is borderline consumer rights violations no matter what anyone here says" reads like an accusation,

"why they dont feel it's necessary to disclose this information to potential customers" is an accusation

"not making even the slightest effort to update that store front with needed information" is definitely an accusation

All of above seem to me stated as facts, no "if" to be seen anywhere.

I agree that changing the store fronts seems not to be top priority for them, merely an afterthought. In fact it was Roland a week or two ago who seems to have reminded them that there was still unfinished bussiness with the console stores. Now I'm counting only from that point, because I'm sure nobody at TFP had any thought for meddling in any way with MS or Sony once it was clear there was going to be no update. The change to the xbox store is obviously a direct result of the reminder by Roland.

While I think adding a disclaimer to the store front would be the right thing to do I also think it isn't really the most important thing to do. Any adult consumer should know that he needs to read reviews of any game for their platform because there are always smaller or bigger changes. There is a long list of console games with atrocious PC ports. The number of people still doing an uninformed buy of 7D2D should be relatively low.

Consumer rights have to do with what a company promises about a product, not what youtube promises. I don't think there is any violation of the law.

--------------------------

PS: please use periods and paragraphs for your posts. It really isn't easy to read and understand your posts.

Actually YouTube videos could be seen as advertising for the product. Look at games like fire firewatch which had measly sales until both pewdiepie and markiplier did playthroughs, really any walking simulator wouldn't be successful if it wasn't for content creators. 

 Next we have the three quotes of mine of which I never actually make an accusation I merely point out that they have not shown an effort to disclose any information to consumers who arent embroiled in the goings on of this game. On any and all videos posted of this game they rarely speak of the console version, any channel aside from 3? Dont even speak of the console version, if people like Neebs, skippy and glock weren't making videos on this game it wouldn't be seeing the uptick in players on any platform. You could write a novel full of people saying "I saw X-Youtuber playing this so i bought it on console" but i agree if youtube videos arent advertising then there is no where that the console version is being talked about because tfp stream on youtube. 

  I haven't made an accusation I have made observations I haven't said they arent updating it because of money or because they're scam artists. I said they arent making an effort to correct this. I recognize there a bit of a language gap here and so much of what I'm saying may read very different. However without assigning intent i have made no accusation, only pointing out an observable truth if they "forgot" about the store fronts that's because they arent making an effort to correct them were they making an effort it wouldn't be forgotten.

 They very clearly don't feel it's necessary to disclose this information because again they forgot about it. 

 And finally yes it IS borderline consumer rights violation because in american law they must disclose all information about a product on the store front they cannot have misleading information and if there is an understood way the product is they have to disclose whether or not the actual product reflects that. An example would be selling a pillow that comes in a set of two but hiding the information that you've split the set in the description. The post itself must reflect any and all information that might make a consumer choose differently where they to have that omitted information. And so even the build number is misleading an 18 when the game is closer to 13.5 and the pc version is on 19 things such as this must be clarified otherwise are a risk.

 

[meganoth]

Actually YouTube videos could be seen as advertising for the product. Look at games like fire firewatch which had measly sales until both pewdiepie and markiplier did playthroughs, really any walking simulator wouldn't be successful if it wasn't for content creators. 

 Next we have the three quotes of mine of which I never actually make an accusation I merely point out that they have not shown an effort to disclose any information to consumers who arent embroiled in the goings on of this game. On any and all videos posted of this game they rarely speak of the console version, any channel aside from 3? Dont even speak of the console version, if people like Neebs, skippy and glock weren't making videos on this game it wouldn't be seeing the uptick in players on any platform. You could write a novel full of people saying "I saw X-Youtuber playing this so i bought it on console" but i agree if youtube videos arent advertising then there is no where that the console version is being talked about because tfp stream on youtube. 

  I haven't made an accusation I have made observations I haven't said they arent updating it because of money or because they're scam artists. I said they arent making an effort to correct this. I recognize there a bit of a language gap here and so much of what I'm saying may read very different. However without assigning intent i have made no accusation, only pointing out an observable truth if they "forgot" about the store fronts that's because they arent making an effort to correct them were they making an effort it wouldn't be forgotten.

 They very clearly don't feel it's necessary to disclose this information because again they forgot about it. 

 And finally yes it IS borderline consumer rights violation because in american law they must disclose all information about a product on the store front they cannot have misleading information and if there is an understood way the product is they have to disclose whether or not the actual product reflects that. An example would be selling a pillow that comes in a set of two but hiding the information that you've split the set in the description. The post itself must reflect any and all information that might make a consumer choose differently where they to have that omitted information. And so even the build number is misleading an 18 when the game is closer to 13.5 and the pc version is on 19 things such as this must be clarified otherwise are a risk.

Thank you, much better to read.

We agree that the store front is absolutely no priority for them. I would also agree that their videos don't mention console much. But there is nothing new to report, so why should they? The console version is a topic that gets "hot" when the PC version is finished. Now the topic is stone cold. Do you see Bethesda talking about Morrowind much? Or their next secret game they want to publish in 4 years?

The version number isn't misleading, it seems to be "1.0.18.0". The numbers in a version number go from most important/more general on the left to less important/more specific on the right.

So the most important number is the "1". A "1" there usually means the first release version. The next number is usually reserved for mayor patches and that means the console version had no major patch. The next number is the subpatches and is often already relatively useless to the common user except to see if one has the already latest version.

So to be clear: The "18" there is the last value of a counter of small patches made by telltale 2 years ago. Any similarity to the alpha number of 7D2D PC is pure coincidence.

Windows 98 likewise is not a modern version of windows 10. Consumer rights lawyers wouldn't get very far if they said that is misleading.

About omission of facts, yes that is a good point. The hard part would be proving that there is an understood way about 7D2D. Understood ways would be knowledge about things all games have, for example games don't overwrite the operating system when you install them, they actually react to input from the user. Does that also include stuff youtubers tells you? That would be giving youtubers the power to define standards.

Another example: Lets say a PC vendor has multiple versions of a PC, one version having a surround chip that makes everyone go "WOOOW" when hearing it. Now the PC vendor has info on every page what the PC includes and only one version has the surround chip listed. Now lets assume lots of youtubers find that surround chip so phenomenal that they talk about this PC with its phenomal surround chip in every video. Does the PC vendor now have the obligation to mention on the page of the other versions of this PC that they DON'T include the surround chip ?

Youtube streamers is advertising in various degrees. How much anything what they show can be construed as a guaranteed quality probably also depends on how many guidelines they get when they are hired. It definitely isn't conventional advertising where the company simply specifies the message.

And whether they are hired when all you do is to give them early access to an experimental. I'd say the chance is miniscule at best but since we both are not lawyers both our guesses are just that, guesses.

If a PC vendor hires a review magazine to test a new PC, the magazine is usually suspected of making a biased test because there is money involved. But does such a test create a guaranteed quality about that PC, if it can't be proven that the vendor directly influenced the test? I would say no.

 

[Ralco]

Thank you, much better to read.

We agree that the store front is absolutely no priority for them. I would also agree that their videos don't mention console much. But there is nothing new to report, so why should they? The console version is a topic that gets "hot" when the PC version is finished. Now the topic is stone cold. Do you see Bethesda talking about Morrowind much? Or their next secret game they want to publish in 4 years?

The version number isn't misleading, it seems to be "1.0.18.0". The numbers in a version number go from most important/more general on the left to less important/more specific on the right.

So the most important number is the "1". A "1" there usually means the first release version. The next number is usually reserved for mayor patches and that means the console version had no major patch. The next number is the subpatches and is often already relatively useless to the common user except to see if one has the already latest version.

So to be clear: The "18" there is the last value of a counter of small patches made by telltale 2 years ago. Any similarity to the alpha number of 7D2D PC is pure coincidence.

Windows 98 likewise is not a modern version of windows 10. Consumer rights lawyers wouldn't get very far if they said that is misleading.

About omission of facts, yes that is a good point. The hard part would be proving that there is an understood way about 7D2D. Understood ways would be knowledge about things all games have, for example games don't overwrite the operating system when you install them, they actually react to input from the user. Does that also include stuff youtubers tells you? That would be giving youtubers the power to define standards.

Another example: Lets say a PC vendor has multiple versions of a PC, one version having a surround chip that makes everyone go "WOOOW" when hearing it. Now the PC vendor has info on every page what the PC includes and only one version has the surround chip listed. Now lets assume lots of youtubers find that surround chip so phenomenal that they talk about this PC with its phenomal surround chip in every video. Does the PC vendor now have the obligation to mention on the page of the other versions of this PC that they DON'T include the surround chip ?

Youtube streamers is advertising in various degrees. How much anything what they show can be construed as a guaranteed quality probably also depends on how many guidelines they get when they are hired. It definitely isn't conventional advertising where the company simply specifies the message.

And whether they are hired when all you do is to give them early access to an experimental. I'd say the chance is miniscule at best but since we both are not lawyers both our guesses are just that, guesses.

If a PC vendor hires a review magazine to test a new PC, the magazine is usually suspected of making a biased test because there is money involved. But does such a test create a guaranteed quality about that PC, if it can't be proven that the vendor directly influenced the test? I would say no.

That would be a good point if these weren't the same product different platforms, a better example would be that PC being sold in 2 different shops but one has the chip removed. 

 And yes the build number is misleading most people dont understand build numbers

 

[meganoth]

That would be a good point if these weren't the same product different platforms, a better example would be that PC being sold in 2 different shops but one has the chip removed. 

 And yes the build number is misleading most people dont understand build numbers

But consumer rights orient themselves at expectations. Hardware buyers don't expects a PC to be different in a different shop. Buyers of games on the other hand expect there to be differences between console and PC, sometimes unnoticeable, sometimes whole DLCs or features like modability are missing. And even on a basic level they ARE not the same product because you can't start a game for the playstation on a PC and vice versa. The binaries are completely different.

Build numbers might confuse people. That doesn't mean they can just make up their own theories and then declare a consumer rights violation. Sorry, even a laymen will notice that A19.0 and 1.0.18.0 are fundamentally different.

 

[Ralco]

But consumer rights orient themselves at expectations. Hardware buyers don't expects a PC to be different in a different shop. Buyers of games on the other hand expect there to be differences between console and PC, sometimes unnoticeable, sometimes whole DLCs or features like modability are missing. And even on a basic level they ARE not the same product because you can't start a game for the playstation on a PC and vice versa. The binaries are completely different.

Build numbers might confuse people. That doesn't mean they can just make up their own theories and then declare a consumer rights violation. Sorry, even a laymen will notice that A19.0 and 1.0.18.0 are fundamentally different.

Mods are not something console players ever expect. That's why it was such a big deal when bethesda announced mods on console (might as well have just said on xbox because of sonys policies regarding mods) name any other game that was lacking such basic content as character creation on console but had it on PC, or was lacking fundamental updates that fixed major issues granted much of the BS that happens to us on console is only worse on pc because of the new zombies they keep adding. Structural integrity is all but broken on console you either have a base that collapses after a few levels or you end up with prefab that collapse leaving floating blocks. Arrows having no understandable flight path, shotguns being better for breaking doors than killing mobs, I enjoy the game but I've never seen a game with such a large disconnect between two versions. 

 You're correct however hardware was a bad example it was yours however a better example would be buying a software disc and it containing half the tools it does at other stores. Also on the store front you have to scroll way to the bottom past the description to even see the build number prior to purchase (on the microsoft store) so even if your average player would understand build numbers which I promise they won't, hiding them is yet another issue that needs fixed 

 

[meganoth]

Come on, first you bring up build number as a problem if the average player sees it, now you complain the average player won't see it because it is hidden. The average player does not need a build number and therefore the build number is not a problem, case closed.

I brought up hardware to show that a product can exist in many different version, nothing more. You try to bring up the example of stores that sell the same product, but I really don't buy that analogy, whether hardware or CD, it just isn't exactly the same product.

The only question left might be whether it can be called a very different version of the same product (think Microsoft Windows Consumer Edition and Enterprise Edition or SomeGame PS4 Edition and SomeGame Nintendo Switch Edition) or even a totally different product with the same name (think Prey from 2006 and Prey from 2014). After all both games only started off from the same code but then were produced by separate companies as independant products.

 

[SylenThunder]

It's obvious Ralco is just here to argue semantics, and no longer has any real value to add. This conversation has run in circles for long enough. The discussion was over days ago.

 

[Roland]

No in fact the listing for new copies of 7dtd read "pulled by distributor" sure digital copies arent technically being distributed but that's still on those who own the game.

I know this is closed but I wanted to clarify this point to any readers who might be misled by this comment.

TFP partnered with Telltale Games specfically because Telltale was a software publishing company. What Telltale brought to the table was the infrastructure to manufacture and distribute physical disks of the game to brick and mortar stores. This was a very appealing benefit for TFP since they had no way themselves of ever getting physical game copies onto the shelves of Walmarts, Targets, and Gamestops. You can imagine what a plus that was for them.

So the reason the physical copies of 7dtd read as "pulled by distributor" is because all manufacturing ceased when Telltale went out of business. There was no more distribution possible. Even once TFP were able to purchase the rights for the console game they still had no way of doing what Telltale did for them as part of their partnership. This constraint would have no bearing of course on digital stores. If TFP had a way to continue the manufacture and distribution of physical game copies and if there was still a demand for the game by stores, you can be sure they would still be selling and not be pulled from distribution. But TFP is purely a PC development studio.