If you want to fix the toxic gaming culture meta then maybe dialing back the hype machine and emotional investment is the better idea instead of cranking it up and making social pariahs about people who leak. They're only leaking because of the already existing hype machine and emotional investment. All they're doing is participating in the spectacle that these publishers purposefully created.
Assuming that none of the leaks were controlled leaks that play into the hype machine anyway. As we know well and good actually happens.
I mean...we've seen the result. The reason why the hype cycle exists is because it is effective. It sucks, and I wish we could live in a world where it isn't effective but it is. It's the same reason why stores are always "discounting" clothes even though the reality is far different. It's effective, therefore it exists.
Pretty sure "stop being so emotionally invested in reveals" wouldn't go over well if I just blurted out what was in the basement to people only watching the anime for Attack on Titan
In spite of leaks, it is effective and it exists.
The record industry at least had a leg to stand on when it came to leaking albums. You downloaded the leak, you might not buy it. That's a logical conclusion. Sadly, the same can't be said for people who watch commercials for a game the day before the commercial is supposed to air.
Lol, this guy was one of the people behind "blog theory" pre smash Ultimate release. He was even in a video where Gamexplain interviewed him and his friend.
More open development. Another way to put an end to leaks. Sounds like a great idea.
I suspect that having an open and documented development would go to further humanize the developers as actual humanize developers. I had a bad taste in my mouth over getting burned by Double Fine but got over it after watching the Double Fine documentary.
Sadly, an open development concept would clash with the pageantry of marketing and sales and those matter more than actual people.
So because someone else leaked something the company has a right to threaten me with being fired. You really don't see how fucked up that is?
Um. I mean, whoever is responsible for the leak is probably the one getting fired. And everyone would be a suspect til they know who did it.
Are they supposed to give everyone a raise when someone on the team was an asshole and leaked something? This is on them, not the company.
she dead
The decision to announce the C&D was their downfall.
But we had people here post that their jobs were threaten because someone else had leaked something. Now do you understand how fucked that is and why it's a problem?
You're saying the work in question isn't a work that can be or is copyrighted? That's really the only way it doesn't apply. And I've argued why in several other posts.
Can't really blame Nintendo, they've got decades long history of secrecy at this point.The game industry's obsession with secrecy over even minor details is borderline fetishistic. Not specifically meaning Nintendo here but embargoes over minor things ending at specific days and hours for example.
Ugh we are obviously just going around in circles so for both our sakes let just agree to disagree and move on.Fucked up for the leakers knowing they can get everyone in shit, yes.
Don't leak. It's as simple as that.
Instead of that, why not push E3 early to May? :D
Like before?
Even better. Every end of the quarter of the calendar year. :D
The game industry's obsession with secrecy over even minor details is borderline fetishistic. Not specifically meaning Nintendo here but embargoes over minor things ending at specific days and hours for example.
People in this thread forget that there's a non-partial judge in a civil case and and judges are rarely stupid when it comes to law.
It's not just a specious argument, it's just impossible to prove legally.
The only thing I could see is proving that leaking all the E3 made you spend a lot of marketing money for nothing. IF you can prove it was for nothing.
Usually the damages for violating an NDA are spelled out in the terms of the NDA in a liquidated damages provision. I imagine that NDA breach damages are often NOT consequential in nature although such consequential damages can be contracted for as well.Gotta prove the financial damage.
"They didn't buy our game because someone leaked our commercial" is a specious argument.
an open development concept clashes with the core nature of making games.More open development. Another way to put an end to leaks. Sounds like a great idea.
I suspect that having an open and documented development would go to further humanize the developers as actual humanize developers. I had a bad taste in my mouth over getting burned by Double Fine but got over it after watching the Double Fine documentary.
Sadly, an open development concept would clash with the pageantry of marketing and sales and those matter more than actual people.
Ok, I'm down for this....then again with all the confs during the year it might not be possible...Even better. Every end of the quarter of the calendar year. :D
Las Vegas maybe?
I'm saying that copyright protects duplication of a work. It does not protect the existence of a work.
You can't claim breach of copyright because someone reports that you have product X in development.
But we had people here post that their jobs were threaten because someone else had leaked something. Now do you understand how fucked that is and why it's a problem?
No games should be announced 4 years prior to completion anyway.Some of you are trying to compare movie announcements with video game announcements which I don't think is a fair comparison. When blockbuster movies are announced years in advance, they are rarely cancelled. Video games, on the other hand, get cancelled behind-the-scenes all the time. Fans get really pissed when they find out about cancelled games, too.
Do we really want to live in a world where games are announced 4 years prior to release and a good chunk of them never see the light of day?
We know when a Studio is producing a movie years in advance (like many many years). Why shouldn't this be the case with games?No games should be announced 4 years prior to completion anyway.
If we're going for the movie analogy, that would be the timeline.No games should be announced 4 years prior to completion anyway.
We can know that a studio is working on a game, they just shouldn't announce it like they do with shitty misleading trailers that the dev team has to crunch to deliverWe know when a Studio is producing a movie years in advance (like many many years). Why shouldn't this be the case with games?
I don't think we get trailers for movies years before release though.If we're going for the movie analogy, that would be the timeline.
Usually the damages for violating an NDA are spelled out in the terms of the NDA in a liquidated damages provision. I imagine that NDA breach damages are often NOT consequential in nature although such consequential damages can be contracted for as well.
In other words, no one needs to show a loss of sales, nor should they, for violation of the NDA to merit any award to the aggrieved party. People who sign NDAs are compensated, in part, for their secrecy surrounding their work. They contractually AGREE to the value of that secrecy (or damages) by the very contract terms under which they sign. In consideration for their secrecy, often a term of their employment, they are compensated.
Anyone saying that a company needs to show damages for an NDA violation is simply ignorant of the fact that the company in question can refer to the NDA, itself, to show the quantum of legal harm owed by the leaking employee.
Everyone: stop armchair lawyering. It's a bad look. We get it, many of you are unsophisticated and are grappling with legal concepts for the first time. But how about you admit you know little and take the time to ask questions rather than purport to know what the law says or how a judge might think.
Yes, you can. It's called "right to first publish". When you're the copyright holder of a work, you also control when you let the public know about it, and when you let the public see it.
I didn't say we'd get trailer announcements. I don't want an announcement that something is in development when devs are constantly developing things that never pan out.We can know that a studio is working on a game, they just shouldn't announce it like they do with shitty misleading trailers that the dev team has to crunch to deliver
I don't think we get trailers for movies years before release though.
good
No games should be announced 4 years prior to completion anyway.
Source that. The first right to publish only concerns actually selling/publishing the work in question. If somebody gives a specific publisher the right to sell their book first before anyone else like Amazon etc., that is the first right to publish that the author of the work gave to them.Yes, you can. It's called "right to first publish". When you're the copyright holder of a work, you also control when you let the public know about it, and when you let the public see it.
I don't really mind that though.I didn't say we'd get trailer announcements. I don't want an announcement that something is in development when devs are constantly developing things that never pan out.
True but there is to be a middle ground between pulling a Killzone 2 and going Sega with the Saturn "it's out now".Why? You have to hire hundreds of people to make a game. Sometimes that's vastly more easy when you can attract talent to a beloved franchise- an unnamed title will not produce the same resumes- and there are lots of other business reasons too.