Slashdot Mirror
No Man's Sky's Steam Page Didn't Mislead Gamers, Rules UK Ad Watchdog (arstechnica.com)
Shortly after it officially launched in August on PlayStation and Windows, No Man's Sky -- the game that sees the protagonist explore space and experience uncertain places -- was accused of false advertising. Players felt that the pictures and videos used to promote the game on its Steam page didn't represent the sort of things players might expect to encounter in the game. Today, a UK advertising regulator has ruled the opposite -- the game didn't mislead gamers. Ars Technica reports: The complainants -- who had been part of a semi-organized campaign upset with the state of the game at release -- insisted that the screenshots on the storefront had seemed to promise various features that turned out to be absent from the final game. These included things like the appearance and behavior of animals, large in-game buildings, large-scale space combat, loading screens, a promised system wherein the different factions contested galactic territory, and general graphical polish. Hello Games' defense rested on the fact that No Man's Sky is procedurally generated, and that while players would not enjoy the exact experience shown in promotional images, they could reasonably expect to see similar things. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) agreed, saying: "The summary description of the game made clear that it was procedurally generated, that the game universe was essentially infinite, and that the core premise was exploration. As such, we considered consumers would understand the images and videos to be representative of the type of content they would encounter during gameplay, but would not generally expect to see those specific creatures, landscapes, battles, and structures." It also ruled that the developers hadn't misled customers over graphics: "We understood the graphical output of the game would be affected by the specifications of each player's computer, and considered that consumers would generally be aware of this limitation."
Another worthless government organisation.
Hundreds of thousands of people were basically WRONG.
Because REASONS.
These kind of rulings only incentivize other development companies to do the same thing.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
I never understood the backlash this game got. It's a video game. And it's fun. Do what you did with the other games you didn't like and GTFOver it.
It had one cool feature, and that was hopping in your space ship and leaving the planet you were on, to go to another one. Apart from that, the game was ridiculously repetitive, and even worse, was missing a lot of features that were being claimed in order to advertise the game.
Just to clarify, this ruling is in regards to their Steam page. Most of the blatant OMS false advertising was done through Sean Murray in interviews and conferences. Unfortunately, this doesn't cover that.
" It also ruled that the developers hadn't misled customers over graphics: "We understood the graphical output of the game would be affected by the specifications of each player's computer, and considered that consumers would generally be aware of this limitation." "
so on a recommended hardware or one exceeding recommended hardware the graphics should have been as advertised....
brb going to advertise something in the UK.
Stop buying shit before you know how good (or bad) it is.
You are perpetuating shitty over-hyped products that flop once people actually get their hands on them.
If you didn't part with your money until it was released, reviewed, tested, a handful of brave souls had tried it out, etc. then companies would have to put out decent products first time rather than rely on pre-release hype to sell enough that they don't have to care that it's a turd they're selling.
It's not even a new thing, this sort of shit was happening long before Duke Nukem Forever and people STILL KEEP BUYING SHIT.
Buy a game after it's been out for a year, and you know whether or not you want it. It'll be cheaper, you'll buy half the amount of games you actually do, they'll be much better quality on average and - best of all - after the first year you won't give a shit about "missing out" because year-old games will still be "new" to you.
And yet, right this minute, the Steam page for the game shows content that isn't in the game, and will never be in the game.
How is that not misleading?
It's on sale now. Haven't bought it because of the reviews. There was/is a MMORPG called Tibia that I played a decade ago for about a year, got up to level 155 without cheatware, but was very repetitive. Is it the same repetitiveness?
If people are upset that at the ruling, they ought to have come up with a better complaint. Make a new complaint, with very explicit descriptions of what is shown on Steam, what is in the game, and what you believe to be the difference between the two.
ASA's done most of the work for you if you read their response. If you think any of their points of comparison are inaccurate, start there. If you think they missed anything out, check if they were in the original complaint, then include those yourself.
Pokemon Go is way worse an offender.
The NMS crap has leaked in to Slashdot! Hasn't any of these people ever watched a Lego commercial?
The greedy, dishonest company.
Name a consumer product where a company can lie about its features and tell the consumer to pound sand and get away with it. Volkswagen lied through their teeth about your Golf's emissions? Grab your ankles, n00b, it's your own damn fault.
I hope the people behind the complaining to ASA wasn't affiliated with Hello Games or Sony.
Imagine if someone filed a poorly worded complaint. In such a case I can imagine that someone like ASA might be more free to interpret what the complaint is about, and if the complaint is vague, or nonsensical, then a ruling against the complaint seem like a sure thing.