Class Action Lawsuit Over Killzone Resolution Moving Forward

Class Action Lawsuit Over Killzone Resolution Moving Forward

Killzone shoot

Douglas Ladore can move forward with his lawsuit alleging that Sony misrepresented Killzone: Shadow Fall's resolution capabilities.

Just how important is it that a game meets its advertised resolution? Important enough that one gamer is taking Sony to court over Killzone: Shadow Fall's failure to output at 1080p resolution in multiplayer. Douglas Ladore filed the class action lawsuit earlier this year, and now his case is officially moving forward: Sony has lost a motion to dismiss "all but one" of the lawsuit's claims, according to Game Informer.

As The Escapist reported in August, Killzone: Shadow Fall advertised native 1080p output on the box and elsewhere, but didn't specify that only certain portions of the game could achieve that natively. The game's multiplayer component, as it turns out, runs at 960x1080 resolution bumped to 1080p through interpolation, which Ladore claims is not an acceptable substitute.

Resolution has been a hotly debated topic this generation, with publishers like Ubisoft causing an outcry over claims of lowering resolutions on one system to match another and stating that most gamers don't really care about 1080p (our comments sections say otherwise). Quite a few games have run at lower resolutions on the Xbox One than PS4, despite both systems having been on the market about the same amount of time.

Is all the debate over game resolution nitpicky? On the one hand, a fun game is a fun game, whether it's 1080p or 900p or from the pre-HD era entirely. On the other, consoles and games aren't cheap, and if we're paying hundreds of dollars, shouldn't we get what we're paying for? In the case of Killzone: Shadow Fall, the court thinks it's at least worth hearing about. Of course, this doesn't mean Ladore has won, or will win; his case just hasn't been dismissed. At least Sony managed to get the claim of negligent misrepresentation thrown out; the publisher can celebrate one tiny victory in an otherwise dismal month.

Source: Game Informer

Permalink

I wonder how much of this could have been avoided by simple and honest communication. Probably all of it. Good luck for next month, Sony.

And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

Was their REALLY a reason to be this picky? and a lawsuit for the sake of lawsuits.
I mean unless the multiplayer drops too Sonic Boom levels of bad (Framerate halves the instant anyone joins and shadows turn into spots on the ground.. that sorta bad) then I don't see the problem.

Hell at least they tried to make it 1080p using some technique instead of doing an Ubisoft and being like "CINEEEEMATIIICCCC111!!"

I just really hate when stupid lawsuits like this happen. A waste of money going nowhere instead of using it to further develop these games or elsewhere.

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

I don't know. Often with these stories the cynic in me would agree with you, but the optimist in me wants to think that these people are idealists and are suing out of principle. Which I can get behind.

There's only so many ways we can get big, multi-billion corporations to listen to us insignificant ants after all.

Barbas:
I wonder how much of this could have been avoided by simple and honest communication. Probably all of it. Good luck for next month, Sony.

Well, they were pretty up front about what could be at 1080p natively and what was bumped up to that when people asked, they just didn't offer that information.

Personally, I don't know the difference between resolutions, and don't really care about it either way, but I support the lawsuit on general principle of straightforward marketing.

Well... they are correct.
The game was advertised as 1080p native. It is not 1080p native.

Then again... it is kinda petty :P ...

Meh, I hope they win anyway. The less BS marketing the better.

It's a shame that we're getting so bogged down in this whole graphics power clusterfuck (again).. and the worst part is, this is all the console manufacturer's doing in the first place. If they hadn't pushed graphics expectations to unrealistic levels just so they had something to advertise... or failing that, at least admit to the limitations of the consoles, maybe we could focus more on the games themselves.

I'm sure most people would rather play a good game that looks "last gen" than a shiny but hollow shit that costs way too much to develop anyway.

And if you really want shiny graphics, push more towards the (significant) PC market, where a lot more people are willing to invest in the kind of power such games demand.

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

A product claimed to do something that it patently, objectively couldn't. Thats a perfect valid reason to sue, if people didnt, then why wouldn't companies just lie about everything?

I have no sympathy for Sony; they aren't some startup who promised more than they could provide out of excitement, they're big boys who know how these things work.

VincentX3:
I just really hate when stupid lawsuits like this happen. A waste of money going nowhere instead of using it to further develop these games or elsewhere.

Companies this size have money budgeted for inevitable lawsuits, this isnt going to kill any games or anything.

The Bucket:

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

A product claimed to do something that it patently, objectively couldn't. Thats a perfect valid reason to sue, if people didnt, then why wouldn't companies just lie about everything?

I have no sympathy for Sony; they aren't some startup who promised more than they could provide out of excitement, they're big boys who know how these things work.

VincentX3:
I just really hate when stupid lawsuits like this happen. A waste of money going nowhere instead of using it to further develop these games or elsewhere.

Companies this size have money budgeted for inevitable lawsuits, this isnt going to kill any games or anything.

What's particularly interesting is that you see discussions about this sort of thing all the time when companies fail to meet what they advertised and people complain no one takes them to task.

When someone calls them on their misrepresentation of facts in their marketing, suddenly it's a frivolous lawsuit.

If Sony had just stated what the game runs at, none of this would have happened.

I think we all now graphics do not make the game. BUT when that is all we have been hearing about how great a game looks graphic wise and how much its important and the recent watch dogs shit and then for KllZone ppls to come out with a lie or half truth. It does not do what they said it would do simple as that.

The Bucket:

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

A product claimed to do something that it patently, objectively couldn't. Thats a perfect valid reason to sue, if people didnt, then why wouldn't companies just lie about everything?

I have no sympathy for Sony; they aren't some startup who promised more than they could provide out of excitement, they're big boys who know how these things work.

VincentX3:
I just really hate when stupid lawsuits like this happen. A waste of money going nowhere instead of using it to further develop these games or elsewhere.

Companies this size have money budgeted for inevitable lawsuits, this isnt going to kill any games or anything.

I'm not saying it is. But a waste is a waste none the less. It's still time and money they could dedicate to something useful and not meaningless lawsuits.

VincentX3:

The Bucket:

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

A product claimed to do something that it patently, objectively couldn't. Thats a perfect valid reason to sue, if people didnt, then why wouldn't companies just lie about everything?

I have no sympathy for Sony; they aren't some startup who promised more than they could provide out of excitement, they're big boys who know how these things work.

VincentX3:
I just really hate when stupid lawsuits like this happen. A waste of money going nowhere instead of using it to further develop these games or elsewhere.

Companies this size have money budgeted for inevitable lawsuits, this isnt going to kill any games or anything.

I'm not saying it is. But a waste is a waste none the less. It's still time and money they could dedicate to something useful and not meaningless lawsuits.

Define "useful"? If you mean they could be doing something to better the world, sure, but you could easily make that argument about playing videogames in general. This will involve little or no time for the consumer; who have a possibility of getting a (extremely small) remuneration for a product that did not do as it claimed it would, and it will cost the publishers legal department a relatively small amount of time and (even worse case law suit outcome) a small amount of cash, which will hopefully encourage them and others to be more truthful in their marketing in future.

I quite like KZ: SF, the gameplay, story and graphics were good. I'd consider the resolution abit picky but that said they did advertise it as such so I can support others that want to sue out of principle. As other's have said Sony should have advertised it on the box and unlike here in Australia the players in the US only have lawsuits to get this sorted (over here I could get a refund on the grounds of false advertising, the store has to take it back by law).

Frivolous for sure but companies can't be allowed to get away with false advertising.

The Bucket:

VincentX3:

The Bucket:

A product claimed to do something that it patently, objectively couldn't. Thats a perfect valid reason to sue, if people didnt, then why wouldn't companies just lie about everything?

I have no sympathy for Sony; they aren't some startup who promised more than they could provide out of excitement, they're big boys who know how these things work.

Companies this size have money budgeted for inevitable lawsuits, this isnt going to kill any games or anything.

I'm not saying it is. But a waste is a waste none the less. It's still time and money they could dedicate to something useful and not meaningless lawsuits.

Define "useful"? If you mean they could be doing something to better the world, sure, but you could easily make that argument about playing videogames in general. This will involve little or no time for the consumer; who have a possibility of getting a (extremely small) remuneration for a product that did not do as it claimed it would, and it will cost the publishers legal department a relatively small amount of time and (even worse case law suit outcome) a small amount of cash, which will hopefully encourage them and others to be more truthful in their marketing in future.

Do I really need to define useful? Is it not clear enough?
Even if it doesn't involve the consumer, I still see it as a waste of the companys time and money to have do with this type of "lawsuit for the sake of lawsuit".

The difference between native 1080p and what they did to the multiplayer aspect of this game is so small graphically that this lawsuit, without a dought, is just absurd.

I'll just leave this here. These guys make my point better than I do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X56fFi9b6LM

VincentX3:

The Bucket:

VincentX3:

I'm not saying it is. But a waste is a waste none the less. It's still time and money they could dedicate to something useful and not meaningless lawsuits.

Define "useful"? If you mean they could be doing something to better the world, sure, but you could easily make that argument about playing videogames in general. This will involve little or no time for the consumer; who have a possibility of getting a (extremely small) remuneration for a product that did not do as it claimed it would, and it will cost the publishers legal department a relatively small amount of time and (even worse case law suit outcome) a small amount of cash, which will hopefully encourage them and others to be more truthful in their marketing in future.

Do I really need to define useful? Is it not clear enough?
Even if it doesn't involve the consumer, I still see it as a waste of the companys time and money to have do with this type of "lawsuit for the sake of lawsuit".

The difference between native 1080p and what they did to the multiplayer aspect of this game is so small graphically that this lawsuit, without a dought, is just absurd.

I'll just leave this here. These guys make my point better than I do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X56fFi9b6LM

I like the way they seem to suggest that for a lawsuit to be valid, the product in question has to have had to murder your family or something; it doesnt, it just has to not work as described. 1080p is a big thing marketing wise, i'm glad someone is taking a company to count so they learn not to stretch or dilute the truth in future.

Edit: As for defining useful, that might be helpful because I don't quite follow, what should he be doing with his time instead of this in your estimation?

This might be the only way they learn to be honest.

Money talks, so let it do the talking for you.

If this means more honest marketing in the future then have at it. I do not care how frivolous people think this particular lawsuit is as the graphics being a big part of modern advertisement needs to be held to more honest standards.

I don't see this one winning. The single-player runs as advertised. So the game does, in fact, offer 1080p. I don't think the fact that it doesn't offer 1080p in all portions of the game is enough to prove false and misleading advertising.

It's very frivolous to sew over something so trivial. Like sueing a shoe company because you're slippers weren't the same color they appeared on your monitor.

Good. Maybe finally it will teach companies that flat out lieing to its costumers is actually illegal.

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

no, this is example of suing somone for blatantly lieing to its costumers.

kaizen2468:
Frivolous for sure but companies can't be allowed to get away with false advertising.

If its false advertisement then its not frivolous.

likalaruku:
It's very frivolous to sew over something so trivial. Like sueing a shoe company because you're slippers weren't the same color they appeared on your monitor.

False advertisement is frivolous nowadays apperently! you wanted to buy red paint but it turned out to be green and now your house is ruined. but of course if you complain people will just shout frivolous!

I love how everyone wants game companies to be held to task for all the lies, misrepresentation and false advertising. However, when someone actually does something about it via a lawsuit(Money is often the only way game companies will listen, it certainly won't be from your quiet indignation) everyone says it is a frivolous waste of time.

Sometimes, a lawsuit is the only thing a company understands. If that is must be done to make game companies show more honey, than so be it.

Given this is in the US, and in the states the right to lie in advertising is currently protected by law, Thanks Coke (and others), anything that could force companies to actually truthfully represent their products can only be a good thing.

Put it this way, if he loses, a game's menu screen alone could output 1080p and the publisher could then happily claim that the game was 1080p. If he wins, there is a chance that all future games would have to, you know, tell the truth about their capabilities in their advertising.

Well, at least in the United States, Sony can pretty much say anything on their products since it's protected by the First Amendment (free speech) to some extent.

Food product have done this since forever.

Personally I am torn between this.
Yes this might raise awerness to companies (if the guy wins) that you can't just market for the case of marketing.
But then again... it feels somewhat... stupid... I don't know how to explain it :/

EDIT: I think my problem with this is that it's such a fine line. The game isn't running on 1080p, it's running on a 960 x 1080 resolution somehow mixing these to make the image seem 1080p even if it isn't "full 1080p".
So basically this is going to court because there isn't an explanation for the legal term of the word "native". Sony sais it's native 1080p, the guy sais it isn't, the problem is in the wording, as always when it comes to legal stuff. This might have a big impact on the legal side of things, for the one consumer, not so much.

Laggyteabag:
And this is just another obvious example of suing someone for the sake of suing someone. Sony really has had a bad month, and this doesn't really help anything.

Oh, I'm so sad for the poor little global megacorporation.

Sony can take it and they should - They could've easily avoided this by not lying about the game's resolution. I'm glad that there are people who won't let companies like Sony get away with deception, no matter how small.

The Bucket:

Define "useful"?

Easy.
Osamu Nagayama, Kazuo Hirai and other Sony higher-ups could spend that money on dick sucking concubines.
And if your heart doesn't bleed knowing that their dicks will be sucked a little less, then you, good sir, are a monster.

kaizen2468:
Frivolous for sure but companies can't be allowed to get away with false advertising.

It's a little more complicated and nuanced then that though? At this point he seems to be suing over not just a matter of false advertising but to do so requires an argument and debate governing the actual definitions of video resolution as they apply to games and consumer electronics. Also what is the standard for advertising? To claim a game is 1080p does the entirety of the game have to run at 1080p? Every frame of every scene and mode? Or does it simply have to clearly and obviously feature a sizable portion of 1080p gameplay? Just as a related example the new Alienware gaming console thingy claims it can support 4k ressolutions. Now we all know that there is no way in hell that it can actually put out a 4k ressolution at an acceptable frame rate for gaming. But yeah it can show a nice pretty 4k picture or pre rendered cutscene or movie. Where is the boundary?

My point is as much as I support "truth in advertising" and frown upon the all to frequent outright fraud, this one seems just a bit to soft and squishy to even consider bringing a case over.

I see this as a great thing. Not because I care THAT much about resolution, but because there have been a bevy of problems with game developers straight out lying to their customers and getting away with it scot free lately, and it's time for some consequences. If they win this, and it gives game devs even a moments pause before lying to us as consumers, then it would have succeeded in a worthwhile endeavor in my opinion.

I don't see this as a resolution issue so much as a false advertisement issue. The game was fine in multi-player. But if it wasn't in 1080p then they shouldn't have said it was.

At least this wasn't a multi-platform game so the consumer shouldn't be able to say that they bought the ps4 version over the XBO one or something.

While the actual resolution differences are small the onus is really on Sony to be completely honest and up front about what resolution their game runs at.

There are some people who really care about that stuff and may even base purchasing decisions on it. Sony, like every other company out there, should be expected to be honest when advertising facts like resolution to its customers. They can say "best shooter on next gen!", but if they are going to release a technical specification like resolution then it needs to be true.

Class action lawsuits are the very definition of a waste of time. That said:

Part of me gets annoyed by whiners when shit like this comes up. The new consoles just don't have the capability to do this, this shouldn't really surprise anyone.

The other part of me wants Sony to pay hard for this. They shouldn't have been lying about lots of things when it comes to this newest generation of consoles. I'm sure everyone remembers how both MS and Sony were talking about 4k before the new systems came out.

So the moral of the story is: Nobody wins.
Yeah, that sounds about right.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here