Why are TFP still selling 7d2d on consoles?

[Jacked-survivor]

I get that tt's crash and burn effectively ended 7's run on the consoles and there is nothing to be done about it. So why is an unfinished game which can be unstable, and won't be worked on any more still up for sale? Seems disingenuous. TFP could at least put a disclaimer on the game info screen to let potential new buyers know what's up before hand.

[Rohan656]

I agree, it borders on a consumer rights issue. I bought the game when patches were still flowing for console. 

I would guess if the game info screen states it's still alpha, thats a nice legal backdoor    

[SylenThunder]

1 hour ago, Rohan656 said:

I would guess if the game info screen states it's still alpha, thats a nice legal backdoor    

The console version has never said it was in Alpha. It was sold as a finished product based on the a14.7 PC version of the client.

[Roland]

There are hundreds of games sold in game stores that are static and as is and never receive updates. The console version of 7 Days to Die is complete as it is and offers many hours of entertainment. It is still a great deal and nowhere is it promised that there will be continuing updates. 

 

If Sony and Microsoft have deemed the game to be stable enough and complete enough to sell in their stores then there is no problem. People often forget that all games must be rigorously approved by Sony and Microsoft before being allowed to be released on their stores. This fact is even one of the hurdles that TFP would face if they were to try updating the game to something that would break saves. That's a huge no-no and a deal breaker for Sony and Microsoft.

 

Every game runs its course. If the game is no longer fun for you because you've gotten all you can out of it, then move on to new games but don't wish to deny new players from being able to purchase it because they are certain to get plenty of fun out of it for what it is as well.

[Jacked-survivor]

Ros, the front page of the 7dtd on  the ps store doesn't mention a complete state note, and the media video is a live action cut of an actor slapping together a palette fort with literally two seconds of game play. The second video is tfp lead named Richard  talking about his love of Minecraft, zombies and oddly enough tell take games.

 

Why not slap up a full gameplay footage video, a note about the end of development or take the game off the store.

[Nef]

On 7/8/2020 at 1:14 PM, Jacked-survivor said:

Ros, the front page of the 7dtd on  the ps store doesn't mention a complete state note, and the media video is a live action cut of an actor slapping together a palette fort with literally two seconds of game play. The second video is tfp lead named Richard  talking about his love of Minecraft, zombies and oddly enough tell take games.

 

Why not slap up a full gameplay footage video, a note about the end of development or take the game off the store.

Well the game selling is up to Microsoft and Sony at this point. 

[Ralco]

On 7/12/2020 at 4:06 AM, Nef said:

Well the game selling is up to Microsoft and Sony at this point. 

If that was true why did all retailers have to stop selling the hard copies? It's not up to the store it's up to the devs as tfp have full rights back they can in fact discontinue the sell on all platforms. 

[mr.devolver]

As a player on PC platform, I can't complain it's still being sold to customers who have no clue about the background of the development on the consoles. It helps the development on PC platform... 😈

[Ralco]

2 hours ago, mr.devolver said:

As a player on PC platform, I can't complain it's still being sold to customers who have no clue about the background of the development on the consoles. It helps the development on PC platform... 😈

And that alone is why it shouldn't be being sold, if the money from console sales are going to pc development and console players are stuck with the game as is that's pretty scummy.

[meganoth]

8 hours ago, Ralco said:

And that alone is why it shouldn't be being sold, if the money from console sales are going to pc development and console players are stuck with the game as is that's pretty scummy.

Is it scummy as well if a developer uses the profit of one game to fund the next game or a game developed in parallel ?

 

[Ralco]

11 hours ago, meganoth said:

Is it scummy as well if a developer uses the profit of one game to fund the next game or a game developed in parallel ?

 

No, but to take profits from a game you've declared you have no intention of doing anything to help and putting those into the version that already has 3 years worth of content up on the console version is. 

[alden666]

I agree with those who are saying that the Fun Pimps do have the rights -- legal or otherwise -- to still sell the game which they do not have plans to update anymore. But as bird person from 'Rick and Morty' said it, " In [our culture], this is considered a d*** move." 

[Nef]

8 hours ago, alden666 said:

I agree with those who are saying that the Fun Pimps do have the rights -- legal or otherwise -- to still sell the game which they do not have plans to update anymore. But as bird person from 'Rick and Morty' said it, " In [our culture], this is considered a d*** move." 

Should all the games from Sony, Microsoft, and Steam's libraries be purged because they're no longer supported but still sold?

On 7/18/2020 at 11:01 AM, Ralco said:

If that was true why did all retailers have to stop selling the hard copies? It's not up to the store it's up to the devs as tfp have full rights back they can in fact discontinue the sell on all platforms. 

You answered your own question. Sony and Microsoft is digital distribution.

[Ralco]

1 hour ago, Nef said:

Should all the games from Sony, Microsoft, and Steam's libraries be purged because they're no longer supported but still sold?

You answered your own question. Sony and Microsoft is digital distribution.

 

1 hour ago, Nef said:

You answered your own question. Sony and Microsoft is digital distribution.

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.

[alden666]

9 hours ago, Nef said:

Should all the games from Sony, Microsoft, and Steam's libraries be purged because they're no longer supported but still sold?

You answered your own question. Sony and Microsoft is digital distribution.

Can you specify which games there are still being sold that have ongoing parallel development in other platforms?

But to answer your question, no they shouldn't be purged if there isn't anymore parallel development going on in other platforms. If otherwise, as I said, it is still up to them. But it doesn't change the fact that doing that is still a d*** move especially when there are no tags and disclaimers saying that the game is not like the more complete version. They know that the PC version is the one getting all the exposure and promotion theses days. They know this will make any individuals newly attracted to the game in the present to have the wrong notion that this is also what they will get with the console version. 

[bacon creepy]

On 7/19/2020 at 7:28 AM, Ralco said:

No, but to take profits from a game you've declared you have no intention of doing anything to help and putting those into the version that already has 3 years worth of content up on the console version is. 

so i expect you to never buy any game that is older than 1 year,  in fact go ahead and throw away any classic  consoles,  start your lawsuit against atari for not updating your E.T. or accept the fact that you bought a game that was updated for free (just like CoD) and now it isnt.

[Ralco]

2 hours ago, bacon creepy said:

so i expect you to never buy any game that is older than 1 year,  in fact go ahead and throw away any classic  consoles,  start your lawsuit against atari for not updating your E.T. or accept the fact that you bought a game that was updated for free (just like CoD) and now it isnt.

And if they stopped updating the PC version and said "buy a new game" y'all would throw a fit. 

[meganoth]

3 hours ago, Ralco said:

And if they stopped updating the PC version and said "buy a new game" y'all would throw a fit. 

News Flash: That will happen to the PC version in aproximately 1.5 to 2 years. And yes, then we will have to buy any DLC or extension or a possible "7 Days to die 2"

 

[Ralco]

1 hour ago, meganoth said:

News Flash: That will happen to the PC version in aproximately 1.5 to 2 years. And yes, then we will have to buy any DLC or extension or a possible "7 Days to die 2"

 

After the game "goes gold" sure were talking about a game that was sold "as finished" and then ceased to have support not a game that will have received its support and been completed being used to drum up extra revenue for the company if funds from the current sells are being used for the PC version and they are 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 such facts must be reflected in the material used for marketing or the store front for the product it cannot be expected that a consumer must seek out information to know that a company has withheld information we are already aware TFP have updated the store fronts to have themselves listed as the publisher it would not be a stretch to wonder why they haven't updated the store front to reflect the fact that the PC version of this game does not reflect the console version. I would be very interested to hear why they dont feel it's necessary to disclose this information to potential customers, rather many only find out after they've purchased the game see the state it's in and then come here or to youtube then find out. A lie by ommission is still a very serious issue when it comes to consumer rights and by not making even the slightest effort to update that store front with needed information they are lying by just saying nothing. 

[meganoth]

8 hours ago, Ralco said:

After the game "goes gold" sure were talking about a game that was sold "as finished" and then ceased to have support not a game that will have received its support and been completed being used to drum up extra revenue for the company if funds from the current sells are being used for the PC version and they are 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 such facts must be reflected in the material used for marketing or the store front for the product it cannot be expected that a consumer must seek out information to know that a company has withheld information we are already aware TFP have updated the store fronts to have themselves listed as the publisher it would not be a stretch to wonder why they haven't updated the store front to reflect the fact that the PC version of this game does not reflect the console version. I would be very interested to hear why they dont feel it's necessary to disclose this information to potential customers, rather many only find out after they've purchased the game see the state it's in and then come here or to youtube then find out. A lie by ommission is still a very serious issue when it comes to consumer rights and by not making even the slightest effort to update that store front with needed information they are lying by just saying nothing. 

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.

 

 

[Ralco]

6 hours ago, meganoth said:

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]

1 hour ago, Ralco said:

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]

4 hours ago, meganoth said:

"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]

12 hours ago, Ralco said:

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]

10 hours ago, meganoth said:

 

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