Slashdot Mirror
California Man Sues Sony Because Killzone: Shadowfall Isn't Really 1080
Sonny Yatsen (603655) writes A California man with nothing better to do has launched a class-action lawsuit against Sony because he claims he was harmed because Killzone: Shadowfall's multiplayer mode doesn't have native 1080p resolution as Sony originally claimed. He now demands 'all economic, monetary, actual, consequential, statutory and compensatory damages' as well as punitive damages from Sony.
as much as I don't care, some game companies need their hands slapped when it comes to false advertising. anyone remember simcity 4 multiplayer?
One one hand, this is a stupid frivolous lawsuit, but on the other hand game publishers have been feeding us so much bullshit and lies that I wish this guy would win just to make a point.
So he should just take it up the rear and not do anything about the company's lies? BOHICA! I'm glad he's suing. Let him represent the rest of us. Hopefully, companies will learn that they can't get away with this BS.
I'm for it. Blatant false advertizing needs to be punished and this is the route that's available to him.
The guy just wants his $50 back because the graphics in the game aren't as good as advertised. Frankly, that's actually a reasonable request. You tell someone the game will perform some technical feat, and it doesn't, no shit the customer wants a refund.
- so every second line consists of pixels from previous frames, but those are still pixels that are not the same as the ones in the current frame, the output has all of the 1920x1080 pixels in it, it's not like 2 lines of pixels are just 1 line stretched vertically. Technically Sony should win this.
That's a bit disingenuous. Could they render at 320x240 and stretch to fill so the output resolution is still technically 1080p and still advertise "1080p" support?
Kind of a trollish headline, but both Sony and Microsoft have advertised 1080p as one of this generations' primary selling points - how is their continued inability to deliver upon this not false advertising, and how else are we to change their behavior if not through legal action? (Please don't say "boycott".)
Not exactly. If they say the game is 1080p, you'd be right to say that 960x1080 presented at 1920x1080 is still accurate. However, if they say the game is at native 1080p, the only definition that fits the bill is 1920x1080 presented at 1920x1080. Sony said the latter.
Okay maybe its not the kind of thing I would be willing to invest time and money in; but you could easily ask the opposite question:
What kind of society have we become when we allow vendors to blatantly misrepresent products prior to sale?
Sony should be honest about the products actual specifications. We have regulations in place because we collectively decided that all the snake-oil selling had to stop. We standardized weights and measures, and pass truth in advertising laws. They should be followed, simple as that.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Yes, it's a first-world problem, but at the same time, that doesn't excuse Sony (and Microsoft) for their false advertising.
Placed side by side with the worst atrocities in the world, all kinds of problems seem trivial. Still, they're problems. So you say "this guy has a serious first-world problem," and I say, "Isn't the world bad enough without companies like Sony and Microsoft piling on little bits of bullshit everywhere? Those little bits add up."
Killzone's multiplayer mode actually outputs natively in 960x1080 resolution, half of the 1920x1080 standard for "1080p." To output full 1080p graphics, this source image is fixed with a "temporal upscale" that fills in gaps with a horizontal interlace made up of pixels from the previous frame. The result is graphical performance that the lawsuit (and many reviews) call "blurry to the point of distraction."
Last time I checked that's called interlaced video, not progressive. Just because source video is 1080i, but goes out the HDMI video transmitter chip as 1080p it does not make it OK to call it 1080p since the source video is not progressive.
This space is not for rent.
To output full 1080p graphics, this source image is fixed with a "temporal upscale" that fills in gaps with a horizontal interlace made up of pixels from the previous frame.
- so every second line consists of pixels from previous frames, but those are still pixels that are not the same as the ones in the current frame, the output has all of the 1920x1080 pixels in it
So..in other words, they advertised 1080p and are delivering 1080i, but presumably at a 1080p frame rate instead of the usual, faster 1080i rate.
I think you're trying to argue that it's still 1080, and it is, but it's still not what they advertised. No, this guy shouldn't be suing them. The FTC should be fining them for false advertising.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
I don't get what the .gif is supposed to mean. Are you trying to reference an image? Why didn't you hyperlink to it?
Fucking puerile moron.
Boy, that escalated quickly!
.jpg :)
Whatever... I learned a new word today! puerile.png FTW.
Yeah, but if I promised my date a whole four inches then gave her a magnifying glass, surely she'd still be disappointed.
A miserable little pile of pixels.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.