PDA

View Full Version : Hex sued by MTG



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

Axle
05-25-2014, 06:52 PM
HEX living for 2-3 years means it has its promise of PVE delivered and will be very successful as proven by the majority of the game hype being that.

osea101
05-25-2014, 06:56 PM
You have to understand there is precedence here. Remember when Epic games sued Silicone Knights over Too Human? Same subject matter (copyright law) different set of facts. Epic eventually won which forced SK games out of business. Remaining retail copies of Too Human was ordered recalled and destroyed by a judge.

It's the first case in history where a Triple AAA game developer has been found liable for copyright infringement.

Edit: Court of Appeals as recently as January 6th, 2014 upheld the 9.2 million dollar judgement against Silicone Knights. That lawsuit apparently commenced back in 2005. That's almost 9 years ago. Shows you how lengthy these court battles can become.

Refer to this interesting article on the subject:
www.polygon.com/2014/1/10/5296424/court-upholds-findings-in-9-2-million-epic-games-silicon-knights

Quasari
05-25-2014, 07:01 PM
You have to understand there is precedence here. Remember when Epic games sued Silicone Knights over Too Human? Same subject matter (copyright law) different set of facts. Epic eventually won which forced SK games out of business. Remaining retail copies of Too Human was ordered recalled and destroyed by a judge.

It's the first case in history where a Triple AAA game developer has been found liable for copyright infringement.
That was due to Silicone Knights taking the unreal engine without having a license. Completely different.

osea101
05-25-2014, 07:03 PM
That was due to Silicone Knights taking the unreal engine without having a license.

Right but Epic alleged, among other things, copyright infringement. The cases are as close as you can come for a comparison.

See this article:
www.polygon.com/2014/1/10/5296424/court-upholds-findings-in-9-2-million-epic-games-silicon-knights

Captain_Obvious
05-25-2014, 07:06 PM
You have to understand there is precedence here. Remember when Epic games sued Silicone Knights over Too Human? Same subject matter (copyright law) different set of facts. Epic eventually won which forced SK games out of business. Remaining retail copies of Too Human was ordered recalled and destroyed by a judge.

It's the first case in history where a Triple AAA game developer has been found liable for copyright infringement.

Edit: Court of Appeals as recently as January 6th, 2014 upheld the 9.2 million dollar judgement against Silicone Knights. That lawsuit apparently commenced back in 2005. That's almost 9 years ago. Shows you how lengthy these court battles can become.

Refer to this interesting article on the subject:
www.polygon.com/2014/1/10/5296424/court-upholds-findings-in-9-2-million-epic-games-silicon-knights

~ Whew, good thing there is only 8 years of content planned. We will be fine ~

Axle
05-25-2014, 07:14 PM
I'm kinda surprised someone thinks Silicon Knights were AAA developers. All of their games are garbage and bargain bin games except Eternal Darkness which was a fluke and sold less than half a million anyways. You aren't AAA if you can't sell a million. They may have put a fortune into Too Human but that's pretty much what ruined them and doesn't make them better developers.

Anyways..your opinion on the matter is fine. You can have that. Just don't try to predict a games life and tell people how they should spend their money on it.

ossuary
05-25-2014, 07:39 PM
It's the first case in history where a Triple AAA game developer has been found liable for copyright infringement.

Wait, we have Nine A developers now? :p

Too Human was pulled off shelves because it was found that Silicon Knights ripped giant swaths of Epic's code straight out and copy/pasted them into their game - even including the developer comments. It was brazen, idiotic, and nothing whatsoever like this situation.

Methinks our "law student" needs a bit more time in the classroom before he's ready for the bar exam.

osea101
05-25-2014, 07:49 PM
Wait, we have Nine A developers now? :p

Too Human was pulled off shelves because it was found that Silicon Knights ripped giant swaths of Epic's code straight out and copy/pasted them into their game - even including the developer comments. It was brazen, idiotic, and nothing whatsoever like this situation.

Methinks our "law student" needs a bit more time in the classroom before he's ready for the bar exam.

There's no reason to be snide. Can you find a better analogous case? If not, please be quiet.

negativeZer0
05-25-2014, 08:02 PM
There's no reason to be snide. Can you find a better analogous case? If not, please be quiet.

If you cant tell the difference between making a game that is similar and blatantly stealing and reusing code from another game then perhaps it is you that should stop posting.

BenRGamer
05-25-2014, 08:06 PM
Sheesh, people. No need to attack others for offering their opinions.

So much for that 'good Hex community'

osea101
05-25-2014, 08:53 PM
Sheesh, people. No need to attack others for offering their opinions.

So much for that 'good Hex community'

It's alright. I understand human psychology really well. People who have low self-esteem because they lack an education or what not will always act abrasive and aggressive towards someone projecting confidence, whether implicit or explicit, because he has attained something they have not.

It's pure petty jealousy and insecurity.

The fact pattern is not the same in these two cases, they rarely are when you study jurisprudence. The point is the subject matter IS the same. It's a copyright claim. It will be heard in a federal court. The point is that two prominent video game companies have sued each other in the past, one won and the other went out of business. It could happen to Hex.

ossuary
05-25-2014, 09:12 PM
Anyone can "project confidence." That's completely irrelevant. Thanks for throwing around wild insults like uneducated and insecure, though. That's not petty at all. Pot, kettle?

A case involving two games using similar core concepts is not the same as a case where code was literally copied, line by line, thousands of lines of it. It's not a comparable situation, except at the very highest of levels (i.e. "a copyright case"). A fly and an elephant are both animals - are they the same thing? I saw an animal once, and it was an elephant. I'm looking at a fly now - but by your logic it could be an elephant!

Your entire supposition is completely ludicrous.

Sure, CZE could lose this lawsuit. Sure, even if they settle, they could still go out of business. But not because Silicon Knights stole code from Epic. The case will be judged primarily on its own merits. If the Hasbro lawyers try to bring up SK/Epic, CZE's lawyers will shoot it down easily, because it's an idiotic comparison with no relevance to this case.

Please don't think I'm singling you out because you're "confident." Plenty of people are still "confident" that there was a dinosaur called "Brontosaurus." Plenty of people are confident that everyone in the 16th century thought the Earth was flat. People are confident that Fox News is fair and balanced. It's not their confidence that I take issue with. ;)

Soken
05-25-2014, 09:18 PM
Anyone can "project confidence." That's completely irrelevant. Thanks for throwing around wild insults like uneducated and insecure, though. That's not petty at all. Pot, kettle?

A case involving two games using similar core concepts is not the same as a case where code was literally copied, line by line, thousands of lines of it. It's not a comparable situation, except at the very highest of levels (i.e. "a copyright case"). A fly and an elephant are both animals - are they the same thing? I saw an animal once, and it was an elephant. I'm looking at a fly now - but by your logic it could be an elephant!

Your entire supposition is completely ludicrous.

Sure, CZE could lose this lawsuit. Sure, even if they settle, they could still go out of business. But not because Silicon Knights stole code from Epic. The case will be judged primarily on its own merits. If the Hasbro lawyers try to bring up SK/Epic, CZE's lawyers will shoot it down easily, because it's an idiotic comparison with no relevance to this case.

Please don't think I'm singling you out because you're "confident." Plenty of people are still "confident" that there was a dinosaur called "Brontosaurus." Plenty of people are confident that everyone in the 16th century thought the Earth was flat. People are confident that Fox News is fair and balanced. It's not their confidence that I take issue with. ;)

Whoa whoa, dont point out fox. All news is not balanced, otherwise they would not get ratings. Come on now.

I agree though, these 2 cases are too different. Just because its video game suing related does not make it apply for this.

osea101
05-25-2014, 10:14 PM
Anyone can "project confidence." That's completely irrelevant. Thanks for throwing around wild insults like uneducated and insecure, though. That's not petty at all. Pot, kettle?

A case involving two games using similar core concepts is not the same as a case where code was literally copied, line by line, thousands of lines of it. It's not a comparable situation, except at the very highest of levels (i.e. "a copyright case"). A fly and an elephant are both animals - are they the same thing? I saw an animal once, and it was an elephant. I'm looking at a fly now - but by your logic it could be an elephant!

Your entire supposition is completely ludicrous.

Sure, CZE could lose this lawsuit. Sure, even if they settle, they could still go out of business. But not because Silicon Knights stole code from Epic. The case will be judged primarily on its own merits. If the Hasbro lawyers try to bring up SK/Epic, CZE's lawyers will shoot it down easily, because it's an idiotic comparison with no relevance to this case.

Please don't think I'm singling you out because you're "confident." Plenty of people are still "confident" that there was a dinosaur called "Brontosaurus." Plenty of people are confident that everyone in the 16th century thought the Earth was flat. People are confident that Fox News is fair and balanced. It's not their confidence that I take issue with. ;)

That's really not how jurisprudence works. I'll give you the cliff notes: when you file a brief you have to note previous cases that were decided in favor of your hypothesis of the case. That's called the analogous case. It's because of a principle called stare decisis. Courts prefer to be consistent in their rulings. The opposing counsel will cite cases that support their hypothesis.

It's entirely possible that the Epic case could be mentioned in the briefs by Hasbro. And again, I haven't perused the details of this case. It's just the closest one that comes to mind. If you have a case that you feel is more analogous please feel free to cite it.

And before you hark on about it being so far off factually you should be aware that even cases that seem far remote can have relevence. I wrote one of my legal research papers on e-commerce. I did a fair bit of legal research and had trouble finding previous case law. The professor returned my initial draft and told me to cite more studies. The examples he gave me were cases I ignored because they seemed too far removed factually from the case I was writing about.

But, I followed his advice and he gave me a good grade on the paper. What you think is irrelevant isn't necessarily irrelevant. Your inexperience and ignorance shines through.

sckolar
05-25-2014, 11:00 PM
I think it can go either way. Both sides have strong claims, and in the end, the side with the better lawyer is probably going to win this one. Court indeed is usually literal, but that does not mean things are guaranteed.

AstaSyneri
05-26-2014, 01:10 AM
I call shenanigans.

There is little to no factual information in osea101's posts, much insult, and "advice" that is potentially very damaging to CZE. At 7 total posts, to beat. If i wanted to do some guerilla work against an opponent in a frivolous law suit I started, this would be exactly the move I'd be making (fostering unrest and uncertainty here).

Kroan
05-26-2014, 01:55 AM
I'm kinda surprised someone thinks Silicon Knights were AAA developers. All of their games are garbage and bargain bin games except Eternal Darkness which was a fluke and sold less than half a million anyways. You aren't AAA if you can't sell a million. They may have put a fortune into Too Human but that's pretty much what ruined them and doesn't make them better developers. This makes me die inside. Eternal Darkness was one of the best games of it's generations (imho). Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain was very, very good and Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes received excellent scores all around.

Sorry for the off-topic, but had to get this out :P Now carry on repeating random statements about law and this case! :D

Hieronymous
05-26-2014, 05:23 AM
There's no reason to be snide. Can you find a better analogous case? If not, please be quiet.

Yeah, there have been a number of cases posted. The main ones people have been linking to are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_East_USA,_Inc._v._Epyx,_Inc. and and the various cases in this article : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/187385/clone_wars_the_six_most_important_.php. The Dataeast and Spry Fox cases even have the advantage of being in the same jurisdiction as the MTG/Hex lawsuit, whereas the one you're citing is from the fourth circuit.

I don't really think the case you're mentioning is useful at all. For one thing the actual offenses alleged are completely different -- the case you're citing involves direct wholesale copying, essentially game plagiarism, whereas what's alleged here is a much more touch-and-go sort of general overlap copyright infringement.

If Wizards ends up relying on the Silicon Knights case I'll be very confident in Hex's future.


EDIT:

On the topic of settlement and this case's future: it depends on what Wizards of the Coast wants. If Wizards wants to bankrupt Hex then they have no interest in settling the case for anything that won't bankrupt Cryptozooic. Conversely, Hex doesn't have much incentive to settle with them, either, unless they can get something that will let them survive as a company (licensing agreement, cosmetic alterations to the game, etc).

My guess is that this goes through the initial filings at least. At that point both sides will probably re-assess.

Infini
05-26-2014, 08:20 AM
I call shenanigans.

There is little to no factual information in osea101's posts, much insult, and "advice" that is potentially very damaging to CZE. At 7 total posts, to beat. If i wanted to do some guerilla work against an opponent in a frivolous law suit I started, this would be exactly the move I'd be making (fostering unrest and uncertainty here).

Your wild conspiracy theory aside, unrest and uncertainty should already be here, due to the lawsuit being a fact alone.

Playing Hex right now is at it's best an unsafe move. Even if this takes n years to resolve, if at the end CZE loses, you effectively lost every dollar and every minute you spent on this game. I personally am afraid that CZE will lose, but that doesn't matter, you can't be sure of the outcome no matter which side of the argument you are on - which, again, means investing anything in this game right now is a risky move.

Doesn't this make you uncertain no matter who posts, or what is being posted ?

ExInferis
05-26-2014, 09:00 AM
Time spent is always lost. What matters is if I think the time is well spent or not. The money invested is another matter but I rather spend them on a good game for a short period than on a bad game for years.

Hatts
05-26-2014, 09:04 AM
Playing Hex right now is at it's best an unsafe move. Even if this takes n years to resolve, if at the end CZE loses, you effectively lost every dollar and every minute you spent on this game. I personally am afraid that CZE will lose, but that doesn't matter, you can't be sure of the outcome no matter which side of the argument you are on - which, again, means investing anything in this game right now is a risky move.

This is a potentially valid conclusion based on the faulty premise that the only value you get out of playing a game is how much money you can get out of it at the end.

If after years and years of litigation CZE loses outright and the court orders them to shut down then I still have had the enjoyment of hundreds of hours of drafts, dungeons, raids, tournaments etc. I played around 100 hours of fallout new vegas on my PS3 before it died, if I trade it in at EB games for $5 (or whatever it goes for now) is that all it was worth to me?

If you invested in Hex (kickstarter or otherwise) with the primary goal of cashing out at a later date your advice is legitimate, owning Hex cards is now a riskier investment due to pending litigation. Regardless of the litigation if I was your financial adviser I would be recommending any number of other investments before Hex cards.

For myself I will continue to enjoy Hex and spend money when appropriate. I won't let my fear of the metaphorical PS3 dying prevent me from enjoying Hex in the meantime.

Captain_Obvious
05-26-2014, 09:08 AM
Your wild conspiracy theory aside, unrest and uncertainty should already be here, due to the lawsuit being a fact alone.

Playing Hex right now is at it's best an unsafe move. Even if this takes n years to resolve, if at the end CZE loses, you effectively lost every dollar and every minute you spent on this game. I personally am afraid that CZE will lose, but that doesn't matter, you can't be sure of the outcome no matter which side of the argument you are on - which, again, means investing anything in this game right now is a risky move.

Doesn't this make you uncertain no matter who posts, or what is being posted ?

Apparently you must live a sad life if return on investment directly correlates to your happiness. Have you ever been outside of your house before? Ever been to a movie? Played a video game? Etc. Pretty sure you lost every dollar and cannot get the time back...
But did you have a good time doing it?

I love all this "the end is nigh" bullshit.

Even if it is, why is it a problem for you to have some good ol' entertainment for years in the meantime? If nobody supports the game like you and your Armageddon homies say to do then Wizards/Hasbro has won. Support the game and we will have a game to play until an impending outcome.

Gotta run, mom is waiting to drive me to school

Axle
05-26-2014, 09:21 AM
This makes me die inside. Eternal Darkness was one of the best games of it's generations (imho). Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain was very, very good and Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes received excellent scores all around.

Sorry for the off-topic, but had to get this out :P Now carry on repeating random statements about law and this case! :D

I'm surprised they actually made Twin Snakes. I thought it was on PS2 first and they were just in charge of porting it to Gamecube in which case it wouldn't count. Weird move for Konami to actually let someone else make that game. Especially them.

osea101
05-26-2014, 09:25 AM
Yeah, there have been a number of cases posted. The main ones people have been linking to are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_East_USA,_Inc._v._Epyx,_Inc. and and the various cases in this article : http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/187385/clone_wars_the_six_most_important_.php. The Dataeast and Spry Fox cases even have the advantage of being in the same jurisdiction as the MTG/Hex lawsuit, whereas the one you're citing is from the fourth circuit.

I don't really think the case you're mentioning is useful at all. For one thing the actual offenses alleged are completely different -- the case you're citing involves direct wholesale copying, essentially game plagiarism, whereas what's alleged here is a much more touch-and-go sort of general overlap copyright infringement.

If Wizards ends up relying on the Silicon Knights case I'll be very confident in Hex's future.


EDIT:

On the topic of settlement and this case's future: it depends on what Wizards of the Coast wants. If Wizards wants to bankrupt Hex then they have no interest in settling the case for anything that won't bankrupt Cryptozooic. Conversely, Hex doesn't have much incentive to settle with them, either, unless they can get something that will let them survive as a company (licensing agreement, cosmetic alterations to the game, etc).

My guess is that this goes through the initial filings at least. At that point both sides will probably re-assess.

Thank you for referencing those cases. I haven't done the research myself, I just used the Epic example because it came to mind. It wasn't meant to illustrate an exact factual scenario, more to show that big gaming companies have sued each other in the past over copyright claims and the results were disastrous for the losing side.

It's unlikely that Hasbro will cite the Epic case but they could. If there are better, more analogous cases they will cite to those first in support of their theory of the case.

osea101
05-26-2014, 09:27 AM
I call shenanigans.

There is little to no factual information in osea101's posts, much insult, and "advice" that is potentially very damaging to CZE. At 7 total posts, to beat. If i wanted to do some guerilla work against an opponent in a frivolous law suit I started, this would be exactly the move I'd be making (fostering unrest and uncertainty here).

I appreciate that you think I work for Hasbro. I wish, if I did I'd tell them to fire whoever is the quality director of MTGO. It's absolutely mind boggling how they haven't done anything to advance or grow the game in all these years.

Yoss
05-26-2014, 09:46 AM
This is a potentially valid conclusion based on the faulty premise that the only value you get out of playing a game is how much money you can get out of it at the end.

If after years and years of litigation CZE loses outright and the court orders them to shut down then I still have had the enjoyment of hundreds of hours of drafts, dungeons, raids, tournaments etc. I played around 100 hours of fallout new vegas on my PS3 before it died, if I trade it in at EB games for $5 (or whatever it goes for now) is that all it was worth to me?

If you invested in Hex (kickstarter or otherwise) with the primary goal of cashing out at a later date your advice is legitimate, owning Hex cards is now a riskier investment due to pending litigation. Regardless of the litigation if I was your financial adviser I would be recommending any number of other investments before Hex cards.

For myself I will continue to enjoy Hex and spend money when appropriate. I won't let my fear of the metaphorical PS3 dying prevent me from enjoying Hex in the meantime.

This.

If you play Hex for entertainment, there is no reason to stop playing due to the lawsuit. The only reason the lawsuit would affect you is if you're speculating on the value of your collection. (Which is valid, just make sure you don't confuse the two.) Am I bummed that my "investment" is now more risky? Sure. But I'm here for the fun more than the chance to cash out later. As such, putting in enough money to get the fun out is worth it to me even if it ends up "wasted".

Quasari
05-26-2014, 10:24 AM
I appreciate that you think I work for Hasbro. I wish, if I did I'd tell them to fire whoever is the quality director of MTGO. It's absolutely mind boggling how they haven't done anything to advance or grow the game in all these years.

I think it's less him saying you work for Hasbro and more that you are trolling. The thread was close to dead before you posted and you basically stirred the hornet's nest again.

sckolar
05-26-2014, 11:04 AM
I think it's safe to say that not a single thing any of you guys post here will determine any guaranteed results of this lawsuit. In other words, nothing you guys say will solve this issue, and you'll just have to wait until it's over. You can predict, but you can't say for sure. Some of you don't seem to be aware of this.

Hieronymous
05-26-2014, 11:50 AM
This.

If you play Hex for entertainment, there is no reason to stop playing due to the lawsuit. The only reason the lawsuit would affect you is if you're speculating on the value of your collection. (Which is valid, just make sure you don't confuse the two.) Am I bummed that my "investment" is now more risky? Sure. But I'm here for the fun more than the chance to cash out later. As such, putting in enough money to get the fun out is worth it to me even if it ends up "wasted".

At this point, given how much I've already sunk into the kickstarter, I might as well draft like crazy to recoup as much play value as I can out of the money I've already spent :P

Banquetto
05-26-2014, 06:32 PM
If you play Hex for entertainment, there is no reason to stop playing due to the lawsuit. The only reason the lawsuit would affect you is if you're speculating on the value of your collection.

I'm playing for entertainment and have no reason to stop playing due to the lawsuit.

But I gotta say.. having that hanging over the game's future encourages me to just enjoy playing with the cards I got from my Kickstarter backing, rather than spending any more money. e.g. it was always my intent to take out a VIP sub as soon as the game went into monetized launch - but now, I haven't done that.

Hibbert
05-26-2014, 08:20 PM
I think the more people that get into Hex, the less likely it is to be shut down.

Think of all of the legal bickering between Apple and Samsung. Now imagine that instead of just seeking to stop the sales of new phones, Apple was trying to make every phone already sold into a brick. That couldn't be good for Apple's PR image.

There are just under 20k backers of Hex. Assuming the game gets into open beta before any real movement occurs on the legal front, that number of "invested" players could really swell. A shut down at this point would be really bad for their PR folks. Hasbro's legal action is pretty unique in that it's basically asking the end user to give up what they "bought".

I know ownership doesn't really apply in the digital world like it does in the real world, but I'm sure almost every MMO player thinks of their characters/gear/loot/etc as their property, despite what the ToU for the games say. While plenty of MMO's have shut down due to attrition, I'm pretty sure none have been shut because of legal action. People loosing "their stuff" because of legal action would be a huge story in the MMO world.

Fateanomaly
05-26-2014, 08:30 PM
The problem is with the lawsuit overhead, less people will be inclined to play much less pay to play the game. This is worsen by the seeming lack of things to do atm.

osea101
05-26-2014, 10:06 PM
I think the more people that get into Hex, the less likely it is to be shut down.

Think of all of the legal bickering between Apple and Samsung. Now imagine that instead of just seeking to stop the sales of new phones, Apple was trying to make every phone already sold into a brick. That couldn't be good for Apple's PR image.

There are just under 20k backers of Hex. Assuming the game gets into open beta before any real movement occurs on the legal front, that number of "invested" players could really swell. A shut down at this point would be really bad for their PR folks. Hasbro's legal action is pretty unique in that it's basically asking the end user to give up what they "bought".

I know ownership doesn't really apply in the digital world like it does in the real world, but I'm sure almost every MMO player thinks of their characters/gear/loot/etc as their property, despite what the ToU for the games say. While plenty of MMO's have shut down due to attrition, I'm pretty sure none have been shut because of legal action. People loosing "their stuff" because of legal action would be a huge story in the MMO world.

I'm afraid a boycott (which I assume you're implying) won't be effective. Gaming boycotts don't work because gamers aren't organized or committed. While I'm sure many are content not playing MTG or MTGO for whatever personal reasons it's not so simple to boycott a company as big as Hasbro.

Their presence on the market place is massive. They own the IPs to popular board games like Risk and Monopoly. Further, they have partnered up to offer various Star Wars and Disney products. If you at some point plan on starting a family, or if you already have a family it's likely you're buying Hasbro products.

Unfortunately this litigation, while it's certainly interesting to follow, will likely only have a small negative impact on an already small fanbase. Even if more people get into hex (and I don't know why anyone would want to risk investing some serious dough in the game right now), it likely won't affect Hasbro's bottomline.

All you can do is hope for the best, this also arguably why settlement is in both parties' interest. Settlement means there won't be years of painful and resource-draining litigation and it also means Hex can move forward to build a community and a fanbase. I just don't see why anyone should invest serious cash into the game given how bad things can turn.

Axle
05-26-2014, 11:00 PM
This guy is such a troll if I've ever seen one. Throwing in some "don't spend money on this game" lines in every single post while trying to seem unbiased to either party. He has existed on this forum just to try to downplay the validity of the game to people.

osea101 has a consistent personality in his digital trail so it's probably not someone related to wizards unless he was payed (lol) but the posts I've seen elsewhere and have seen here are complete asinine and a waste of time. Seems like a person more than willing to try and sabotage a games profits the best he can.

flagoon
05-26-2014, 11:59 PM
osea101 has a consistent personality in his digital trail so it's probably not someone related to wizards unless he was payed (lol) but the posts I've seen elsewhere and have seen here are complete asinine and a waste of time. Seems like a person more than willing to try and sabotage a games profits the best he can.

Well, he convinced me, I'm going to buy some platinum or whatever the currency is :) I waited too long for key for complicated TCG to leave it right now.

As for Hex being sued, WotC has nothing. I don't see ID Software suing Call of Duty, just because it's and FPS. For every similarity there are 2 differences.

Oroniss
05-27-2014, 12:21 AM
Yeah, while it's good to have differing opinions, I have to admit I don't usually pay much attention to posters who have a lot of negativity and only started posting after the lawsuit was announced.

If the game isn't for certain people, that's totally fine, but coming onto the forums to bash it or portray it as doomed doesn't really add any value to the discussion.

Arbiter
05-27-2014, 03:19 AM
You should be looking at the arguments, not the post count. The main reason I started posting here was because I was tired of seeing rude and dismissive posts here just because they were a new poster. At least then people have to talk about the issues, not just shoot the poster. There are two sides here, both of which are a little murky and it just isn't clear what will happen. Osea11's posts can be argued against on merit, without abusing or defaming him/her just because no topic really inspired him/her to sign up.

This is a jury trial. The one thing you can count on is that there won't be a jury full of HEX backers.

AstaSyneri
05-27-2014, 03:45 AM
You should be looking at the arguments, not the post count. [..] Osea11's posts can be argued against on merit, without abusing or defaming him/her just because no topic really inspired him/her to sign up.

Exactly. He states he has no experience, just finished his studies/exams. He analyzes some of the situation (nothing there). Then gives the unwarranted "advice" not to spend money on Hex.

It's the last part that's very fishy to me. Care to tell otherwise?

Kami
05-27-2014, 05:10 AM
Exactly. He states he has no experience, just finished his studies/exams. He analyzes some of the situation (nothing there). Then gives the unwarranted "advice" not to spend money on Hex.

It's the last part that's very fishy to me. Care to tell otherwise?

Why exactly is this important? He stated his case as he is allowed to.

You disagree, as you're allowed to as well.

Let's keep this impersonal.

ossuary
05-27-2014, 05:17 AM
Let's keep this impersonal.

Go tell that to the guy who calls any detractor uneducated and jealous.

jimmywolf
05-27-2014, 05:34 AM
tit for tat

their never be 2 or more people with different opinions, about a topic that has a negative outcome, with out people eventually feeling like it personal an then wanting too retaliate when their opinion is different.

the best thing to do is acknowledge what they say, reply if you want state your opinion but also keep it impersonal. cause no one really wins in the game of i know better then you do.

Kami
05-27-2014, 06:08 AM
Go tell that to the guy who calls any detractor uneducated and jealous.

Then ignore those parts. Keep in mind that in debates, purposefully trying to discredit your opponent with no conclusive evidence weakens your own credibility.

If you have nothing to add or rebutt then don't respond. As I've stated before, you cannot control what others do but you can control how you react.

ossuary
05-27-2014, 06:18 AM
Bah, what's the point of freely admitting I'm a jerk if I then can't be a jerk? :)

osea101
05-27-2014, 08:28 AM
Go tell that to the guy who calls any detractor uneducated and jealous.

You insulted my choice of career and my hard work; you basically called me incompetent and unworthy of the bar exam. It was flame bait, I took it and I schooled you. I don't see what the problem is here, I called you jealous, you alone.

osea101
05-27-2014, 08:31 AM
Exactly. He states he has no experience, just finished his studies/exams. He analyzes some of the situation (nothing there). Then gives the unwarranted "advice" not to spend money on Hex.

It's the last part that's very fishy to me. Care to tell otherwise?

What's so unwarranted about it? I gave you reference to a case where one big company sued the other of copyright infringement. The defendant lost that case and went out of business. TCGs are notoriously expensive. I remember pumping in thousands of dollars into MTGO before I finally sold my collection for good.

I'm just cautioning anyone from spending some serious cash. And further, you should only spend as much as you are comfortable potentially losing several years from now. You won't be able to sell your collection if this law suit follows through. It's just something to think about.

You are of course free to spend as you wish.

Cory_Jones
05-27-2014, 08:42 AM
This thread has run its course and has become cat-nip for trolls, clearly osea101 is a troll. he adds nothing constructive to the conversation but claim a degree of expertise and recommends you stop playing HEX in just about all of his 10 posts. As we deal with the outstanding issues, we are likely to draw more of this type of poster to our awesome community. I don't want it to damage the tribe we have built. please always remain positive, calling out an obvious Troll is fine just be polite :)

so I locked this thread, when there is more to talk about on this front I am sure a new 100+ page thread will pop up :)

-cory