Post by: Xbox-Scene on December 08, 2007, 10:44:00 PM
Class Action Connect offers lawsuit against Bungie for Halo3's missing pixels Posted by XanTium | December 9 00:08 EST | News Category: Xbox360 |
| From classactionconnect.com: Quote
Full Story/Submit Form: classactionconnect.com |
Post by: Fox the Sly on December 08, 2007, 10:44:00 PM
Where's my $60?
Post by: skEwb on December 08, 2007, 10:53:00 PM
Post by: pholly on December 08, 2007, 10:59:00 PM
Post by: XmentalX on December 08, 2007, 11:21:00 PM
Post by: Puffer on December 08, 2007, 11:30:00 PM
This post has been edited by Puffer: Dec 9 2007, 07:40 AM
Post by: SpIdErXeN on December 08, 2007, 11:32:00 PM
Post by: appleman76 on December 08, 2007, 11:34:00 PM
Post by: Puffer on December 08, 2007, 11:39:00 PM
QUOTE(mlmadmax @ Dec 9 2007, 01:07 AM) 
While I agree that the standard microsoft came up with should have been included in every game there is no effin way they are going to win that hoarseshit let alone get in court. And people all over the WORLD are sue happy not just in the states.
If they do win I won't turn down the money though.
I'm not sue happy, in fact, this is the first lawsuit I will have ever joined. However, I was very disappointed with the graphics in the game as it did seem very "blocky" at times when my tv overscanned to scale up to a 720p display. If they had been honest in the first place I would have been happy.
I had the same problem with GT4 on the PS2 and the constant jitter that occured when you started a race. We (gamers) wait a long time, and through several delays, for these games. The least the game companies could do is let us know the truth about the graphics we are about to spend 60 - 80 dollars on.
I even went so far as to buy the legendary edition and got scratched disks that MS never decided to replace for me. Just kinda bummed by the whole release. However I won't go so far as to say that it was a horrible game like some others. I thought it was a good story and a great play minus the graphics problems I had.
Post by: Martinchris23 on December 09, 2007, 12:23:00 AM
QUOTE(Puffer @ Dec 9 2007, 07:15 AM) 
However, I was very disappointed with the graphics in the game as it did seem very "blocky" at times when my tv overscanned to scale up to a 720p display.
I never experienced anything like this on my 720p/1080i display - sounds to me you should be suing the tv company for making a substandard product.
Post by: ThaCrip on December 09, 2007, 12:05:00 AM
p.s. the games (Halo3) overrated anyways. they should sue cause of that instead lol (just kidding)
This post has been edited by ThaCrip: Dec 9 2007, 08:07 AM
Post by: radio5 on December 09, 2007, 12:52:00 AM
This post has been edited by radio5: Dec 9 2007, 08:53 AM
Post by: jdsony on December 09, 2007, 01:30:00 AM
QUOTE(Puffer @ Dec 9 2007, 08:15 AM)
We (gamers) wait a long time, and through several delays, for these games. The least the game companies could do is let us know the truth about the graphics we are about to spend 60 - 80 dollars on.
Jeez...No one forced you to wait, you chose to do that on your own. No one forced you to buy the game, you did that on your own too. The system outputs 720p regardless of what resolution the game was created in so the issues you are having on your TV are not due to the resolution. Companies make games with awful graphics all the time even in full 720p, does that mean they should be sued too. You were caught up in the hype and just took their word for the graphics being amazing. I had no high expectations of the graphics (did you play Halo 2?). The fact the game is less than 720p is not the main aspect causing the graphics from being less than stellar.
Post by: amak1131 on December 09, 2007, 01:08:00 AM
Post by: peter0328 on December 09, 2007, 01:16:00 AM
QUOTE
...Halo 3 was advertised as having a 720p resolution (720 pixels), it natively renders at 640p (640 pixels) and is simply scaled up to 720p.
The people behind this lawsuit don't even have their facts straight. 720p is not 720 pixels, it is 921,600 pixels. 720p stands for 720 progressively scanned lines of picture. The same is true for their analysis of 640p, it is not 640 pixels but it is actually 819,200 pixels if the resolution is 1280x640. It is actually missing 80p or 102,400 pixels. This error should be fixed immediately if they actually want this lawsuit to be considered somewhat seriously.
This post has been edited by peter0328: Dec 9 2007, 09:16 AM
Post by: limbfilter on December 09, 2007, 02:06:00 AM
QUOTE(peter0328 @ Dec 9 2007, 03:52 AM)
The people behind this lawsuit don't even have their facts straight. 720p is not 720 pixels, it is 921,600 pixels. 720p stands for 720 progressively scanned lines of picture. The same is true for their analysis of 640p, it is not 640 pixels but it is actually 819,200 pixels if the resolution is 1280x640. It is actually missing 80p or 102,400 pixels. This error should be fixed immediately if they actually want this lawsuit to be considered somewhat seriously.
Was just about to post this...
And I think it's 1152 X 640
so it's actually missing 184320 pixels...If I did the math right...
Post by: gg22mm on December 09, 2007, 01:37:00 AM
QUOTE(skEwb @ Dec 9 2007, 01:29 AM)
Why is everyone so surprised? If you go to a store and purchase a crucial drug for example that is used to keep you healthy and the drug says 200mg on the label but you instead get the wrong dose of 150mg and end up having health issues, why can't this apply to games? False advertising is false advertising period. I hope they win.
I was totally against this suit just up until I read your post... It really made me realise how short sighted I was... Of course medicine and video games are the same ...</sarcasm>
Best post by far... dude you got me laughing for a long while there after reading it... I truly hope you are not serious... Actually the best part was me thinking you where serious
Post by: xboxmodder4life on December 09, 2007, 02:30:00 AM
from bungie.net
QUOTE
You Owe me 80p!
One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at 640p which isnt even technically a resolution. However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?
Naturally its more complicated than that. In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers both of which render at 1152x640 pixels. The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image.
This ability to display a full range of HDR, combined with our advanced lighting, material and postprocessing engine, gives our scenes, large and small, a compelling, convincing and ultimately real feeling, and at a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels. Making this decision simpler still is the fact that the 360 scales the
almost-720p image effortlessly all the way up to 1080p if you so desire.
In fact, if you do a comparison shot between the native 1152x640 image and the scaled 1280x720, its practically impossible to discern the difference. We would ignore it entirely were it not for the internets propensity for drama where none exists. In fact the reason we havent mentioned this before in weekly updates, is the simple fact that it would have distracted conversation away from more important aspects of the game, and given tinfoil hats some new gristle to chew on as they catalogued their toenail clippings.
One item making the interwebs rounds this week was the scandalous revelation that Halo 3 runs at 640p which isnt even technically a resolution. However, the interweb detectives did notice that Halo 3s vertical resolution, when captured from a frame buffer, is indeed 640 pixels. So what gives? Did we short change you 80 pixels?
Naturally its more complicated than that. In fact, you could argue we gave you 1280 pixels of vertical resolution, since Halo 3 uses not one, but two frame buffers both of which render at 1152x640 pixels. The reason we chose this slightly unorthodox resolution and this very complex use of two buffers is simple enough to see lighting. We wanted to preserve as much dynamic range as possible so we use one for the high dynamic range and one for the low dynamic range values. Both are combined to create the finished on screen image.
This ability to display a full range of HDR, combined with our advanced lighting, material and postprocessing engine, gives our scenes, large and small, a compelling, convincing and ultimately real feeling, and at a steady and smooth frame rate, which in the end was far more important to us than the ability to display a few extra pixels. Making this decision simpler still is the fact that the 360 scales the
almost-720p image effortlessly all the way up to 1080p if you so desire.
In fact, if you do a comparison shot between the native 1152x640 image and the scaled 1280x720, its practically impossible to discern the difference. We would ignore it entirely were it not for the internets propensity for drama where none exists. In fact the reason we havent mentioned this before in weekly updates, is the simple fact that it would have distracted conversation away from more important aspects of the game, and given tinfoil hats some new gristle to chew on as they catalogued their toenail clippings.
they use the two frame buffers so they can argue they actaully are giving you more then 720 vertical lines of resolution. Even so the final output of the signal is up to 1080p is not misleading because the final output resolution is that. This is because the xbox360 upscales everything...So this lawsuit has absolutely no feet to stand on. These lawyers do not understand what a frame buffer is let alone how two work together so i doubt they will even be able to go after bungie when bungie brings in their lead programmer to explain to them in the most technical terms how this works. The lawyers obviousbly havent done their research at all.
Post by: mr_spoon on December 09, 2007, 03:58:00 AM
spoon
Post by: Denders on December 09, 2007, 05:54:00 AM
This post has been edited by Chancer: Dec 9 2007, 08:15 PM
Post by: eduardor2k on December 09, 2007, 05:54:00 AM
If they want to fix this quickly, they can release a patch that ouputs a 720p natively, but i don't know if the game will run smothly, i think it will but not through the whole game.
This post has been edited by eduardor2k: Dec 9 2007, 01:59 PM
Post by: fiya on December 09, 2007, 06:48:00 AM
trust me, ppl like choppy frame rates; look at two worlds!...lol
Post by: SNAAAKE on December 09, 2007, 06:49:00 AM
Post by: sryan2k1 on December 09, 2007, 08:08:00 AM
QUOTE(Puffer @ Dec 9 2007, 08:15 AM)
I'm not sue happy, in fact, this is the first lawsuit I will have ever joined. However, I was very disappointed with the graphics in the game as it did seem very "blocky" at times when my tv overscanned to scale up to a 720p display. If they had been honest in the first place I would have been happy.
Except for the fact that your TV did no such thing, the 360s fixed output modes of 480i/p, 720p, 1080i/p (VGA not included) proves this. Your TV was getting a 720p signal and was doing no such scaling, unless you were feeding it not it's native resolution. It sounds like you just have a shitty TV.
Post by: Johnwinger on December 09, 2007, 08:11:00 AM
I for one am against lies and deceit.
Bungie openly admitted that they lied to everyone. This is unacceptable.
When you buy something and it is advertised to have a capability that it does not, then that company is using FALSE ADVERTISEMENT.
It's against the law to openly lie like that.
This post has been edited by Johnwinger: Dec 9 2007, 04:24 PM
Post by: Elemino on December 09, 2007, 07:43:00 AM
Post by: luther349 on December 09, 2007, 08:28:00 AM
this suit is like 10 years to late rember the old ff commercals where they showed only the cut scenes and no game play making the game seem like some 3d wonder on the ps1 but really a 2d with movies. but as for halo 3 this is retarded who cares really. hardly a 2d game pretending to be 3d.
This post has been edited by luther349: Dec 9 2007, 04:32 PM
Post by: joanjett on December 09, 2007, 08:00:00 AM
QUOTE(skEwb @ Dec 9 2007, 07:29 AM)
Why is everyone so surprised? If you go to a store and purchase a crucial drug for example that is used to keep you healthy and the drug says 200mg on the label but you instead get the wrong dose of 150mg and end up having health issues, why can't this apply to games? False advertising is false advertising period. I hope they win.
agree a 110% sony needs to to be tought a lesson like this all all the lies they promissed about ps3.
Post by: HotKnife420 on December 09, 2007, 08:02:00 AM
1) Bungie mentioned this either right before or right after Halo 3's release, so it's not like it was totally 'secret'
2) Bungie saying it (talking about this) "would've distracted people..." was to follow with "...from buying Halo 3"
3) False advertising is false advertising, and if they did advertise falsely, then they're no better than people who scam stores on returns (ie: fraudalant; wrong is wrong).
4) Halo 3 is suprisingly blocky. Graphics are very jagged in some parts, unlike other games (GoW)
5) Halo 3 was VERY dissapointing to many, so I'm sure that's what the issue is REALLY about
Post by: creepyplaidman on December 09, 2007, 08:36:00 AM
Post by: Blackbolt on December 09, 2007, 10:21:00 AM
I'm almost gobsmacked, pathetic... just utterly pathetic human beings responsible for this.
Post by: jrl on December 09, 2007, 10:59:00 AM
BTW it is the lawyers who are attempting to start this lawsuit, but when greedy people start to see dollar signs they might jump on it. Fortunately for Bungies case, they have logged all the hours of every player who has played Halo 3. "If you didnt like the game why did you play it so much?" is all that is needed to be asked.
I was disappointed by the graphics in the gameplay, but I really bought the game because I liked the Halo series. If there was a sacrafice to resolution for gameplay I think it makes sense. Can you imagine if the game slowed way down in a game or Rockets because of a little better resolution?
my .02 cents
-Joe
This post has been edited by Chancer: Dec 9 2007, 08:17 PM
Post by: jimbobjim on December 09, 2007, 11:48:00 AM
For those that don't know 1GB=1024MB. That's why when you buy a 300GB hdd you lose 300x24MB or 7.2GB.
I find it strange how nothing has been done about this, yet people are gonna shaft bungie for nothing.
Post by: Johnwinger on December 09, 2007, 11:56:00 AM
Halo 3 is full of over-promise and under-deliver as well as false-advertisement.
Post by: Chancer on December 09, 2007, 12:12:00 PM
the discussion is about the resolution of H3 and the lawsuit.
Turn it into countries v countries and generalisations about types of people based on origin and the thread is finished.
If your post is missing don't re-make it
This post has been edited by Chancer: Dec 9 2007, 08:25 PM
Post by: clp on December 09, 2007, 12:50:00 PM
QUOTE(jimbobjim @ Dec 9 2007, 12:48 PM)
So why haven't the hard drive companies been sued for turning 1GB into 1000MB, so that their drives seem to have larger capacity?
For those that don't know 1GB=1024MB. That's why when you buy a 300GB hdd you lose 300x24MB or 7.2GB.
I find it strange how nothing has been done about this, yet people are gonna shaft bungie for nothing.
Bottom feeding trail lawyers already cross that one off their list. Seagate settled. Case was "Cho v. Seagate Technology (US) Holdings, Inc."
The US needs tort reform badly; unfortunately the US senate is 60% lawyers. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
Post by: irnchriz on December 09, 2007, 12:45:00 PM
QUOTE(Puffer @ Dec 9 2007, 09:15 AM)
I'm not sue happy, in fact, this is the first lawsuit I will have ever joined. However, I was very disappointed with the graphics in the game as it did seem very "blocky" at times when my tv overscanned to scale up to a 720p display. If they had been honest in the first place I would have been happy.
I had the same problem with GT4 on the PS2 and the constant jitter that occured when you started a race. We (gamers) wait a long time, and through several delays, for these games. The least the game companies could do is let us know the truth about the graphics we are about to spend 60 - 80 dollars on.
I even went so far as to buy the legendary edition and got scratched disks that MS never decided to replace for me. Just kinda bummed by the whole release. However I won't go so far as to say that it was a horrible game like some others. I thought it was a good story and a great play minus the graphics problems I had.
WTF are you talking about????
Your TV over-scanned to scale up to 720p??? The upscale is done in the 360 hardware you retard, your tv is receiving a 720p format signal.
As for not getting your discs replaced, Microsoft had a disc replacement scheme so if you didn't take this offer up then tough shit. Also, most of the scratched discs were not in the legendary box as the discs were packed in standard cases. The discs that they had issues with were in the collectors edition because the disc clip was not standard.
Post by: Mr_Milenko on December 09, 2007, 01:30:00 PM
Post by: johnnyrico on December 09, 2007, 01:52:00 PM
do they even realize that class action lawsuits can completely destroy a company?
and for christ sake, 80 pixels! that's ridiculous!
sure halo 3 isn't native 720p, but bungie had their reasons for doing it like that.
those who whine about bungie choosing the path that is most efficiënt in their eyes shouldn't be playing videogames in the first place!
jrl brings up a good point: bungie can pull the logs and reject any damage claims from people who have been playing the game SINCE after they announced it wasn't entirely native but an intermediate solution to acquire 720p, as those who have been playing since after it was announced have had the chance to know it.
besides, by playing the game THEY AGREED TO THE EULA.
those who whine, get over it, by inserting the disk and playing you agreed to the MS EULA, simple as that.
hotknife420: it's not like bungie is the first company to commit false advertising, the competition has done it over and over, not to mention tons of industries do it
ultimate BESIDES: the lawyers are wrong to consider sueing bungie as at the time halo 3 was made, Bungie was actually Microsoft, so they should sue Microsoft, not bungie studios.
and I doubt even a top team of lawyers can beat MS in a courtroom.
all those who sign that petition are selfish greedy pricks in my eyes who fail to appreciate the work of a group of dedicated developers who get paid a regular sum of money and not the millions the publisher makes.
This post has been edited by johnnyrico: Dec 9 2007, 09:59 PM
Post by: MrFish on December 09, 2007, 02:31:00 PM
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 09:52 PM)
besides, by playing the game THEY AGREED TO THE EULA.
those who whine, get over it, by inserting the disk and playing you agreed to the MS EULA, simple as that.
By reading this post you agree to give me $100.
Sorry, contract law doesn't work like that. That's why you have to read and say 'I agree' to the TOS when you sign up to Live. They can't just say 'by playing on Live you agree to the EULA'.
Activision's "by looking at this you can't use the Rock Band guitar to play Guitar Hero III" is equally invalid.
Post by: jimbobjim on December 09, 2007, 01:56:00 PM
QUOTE(clp @ Dec 9 2007, 07:50 PM)
Bottom feeding trail lawyers already cross that one off their list. Seagate settled. Case was "Cho v. Seagate Technology (US) Holdings, Inc."
The US needs tort reform badly; unfortunately the US senate is 60% lawyers.
Yeah I read about that after I posted.
However, there are still many other hdd manufacturers that haven't been done.BTW, i'm not saying I hate hdd manufacturers and would never try to sue them for this. I'm just saying it's a tad misleading the way you buy a stated amount of space only to find some of it's missing.
I suppose the point I'm trying to make is... Destroying a hardworking company that brings so much joy to millions of lives, because of a tiviality such as this, is just plain wrong.
I don't really like the Halo franchise but I hope Bungie beat this crap.
Post by: 0794 on December 09, 2007, 02:30:00 PM
QUOTE(xboxmodder4life @ Dec 9 2007, 03:30 AM)
they will never win this lawsuit
from bungie.net
they use the two frame buffers so they can argue they actaully are giving you more then 720 vertical lines of resolution. Even so the final output of the signal is up to 1080p is not misleading because the final output resolution is that. This is because the xbox360 upscales everything...So this lawsuit has absolutely no feet to stand on. These lawyers do not understand what a frame buffer is let alone how two work together so i doubt they will even be able to go after bungie when bungie brings in their lead programmer to explain to them in the most technical terms how this works. The lawyers obviousbly havent done their research at all.
exactly, you can't explain that with just labeling on the back of the box - maybe a simple asterisk would have spared them from this mess. well it must be interesting to see what comes of this, but more than likely this will be dismissed as they have very little clear substantial evidence or proof of their claims.
Post by: tkkyj on December 09, 2007, 03:16:00 PM
What display method less of 720p can display a 640p signal?
720p is the lowest supported resolution that can display the output signal.
Post by: Caswell on December 09, 2007, 03:17:00 PM
The Xbox outputs the video at 720p. You wanted 720p, the Xbox gives you 720p. What are you complaining about? It doesn't say "rendered at a native resolution of exactally 1280x720", it says 720p. It's like buying a can of coke. More than half that can is water. Are you going to sue them because they didn't give you concentrated coke? They have to add the water to make the whole thing work.
I'd wager than anyone complaining about this isn't a programer/designer/etc. I'd also wager a guess than it looks better rendered at 640p with the extra features (lighting, etc), than it would at 720p with no extra features.
Post by: johnnyrico on December 09, 2007, 03:26:00 PM
QUOTE(MrFish @ Dec 9 2007, 11:31 PM)
By reading this post you agree to give me $100.
Sorry, contract law doesn't work like that. That's why you have to read and say 'I agree' to the TOS when you sign up to Live. They can't just say 'by playing on Live you agree to the EULA'.
Activision's "by looking at this you can't use the Rock Band guitar to play Guitar Hero III" is equally invalid.
Not entirely correct: on the box it says you MUST agree to the enclosed EULA in either the manual or enclosed booklet if you want to use the software, if you don't agree you should return it to the retailer you bought it from.
since you MUST agree if you want to use the program, it's pretty obvious that when you played it, you legally agreed to the EULA.
it's like having to sign a nondisclosure contract before being allowed to see classified information: you MUST agree to shut up if you wanna see it, or you can't see it.
Also, they offer you the chance to read the EULA when signing up for MS services and you have to select "I Agree" to use it.
therefor, MS can pull the Xbox Live logs, use that as a proof somebody agreed to their terms of use for the LICENSE they give you.
besides, if there's anything waterproof at MS, it's their contracts and EULA's.
alternatively, they can request the accuser to show a proof of purchase.
since MS offers a limited 90-day warranty on most software in the US and Canada, you've only got 90 days to complain.
remember, this is MS we're talking about, they could even check the date the first halo 3 savegame was made and use that as proof.
too bad nobody RTFM's or the EULA's they get shown.
sorry mate, but MS does have 1 thing that's bulletproof and it's their legal department.
people used the game and the boxes and/or manuals read you have to agree to the EULA's, since they aren't allowed to play if they disagreed, they showed they agreed by playing because you must agree BEFORE playing, once you played there's no turning back.
the agreement has been made before the act, plain simple.
This post has been edited by johnnyrico: Dec 9 2007, 11:30 PM
Post by: SueMiBlitch on December 09, 2007, 04:15:00 PM
this doesn't hurt anyone, u can't really tell the difference, and i doubt people were outraged enough to go return the game
these assholes are just trying to get money because out of the millions of people that bought halo there will be the douchebags that go and sign up for this
i hope M$ and bungie put in the money to repel this crap and then counter sue to get their legal expenses back bankrupting the losers
Post by: iamjacksass on December 09, 2007, 03:44:00 PM
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 10:26 PM)
Not entirely correct: on the box it says you MUST agree to the enclosed EULA in either the manual or enclosed booklet if you want to use the software, if you don't agree you should return it to the retailer you bought it from.
since you MUST agree if you want to use the program, it's pretty obvious that when you played it, you legally agreed to the EULA.
it's like having to sign a nondisclosure contract before being allowed to see classified information: you MUST agree to shut up if you wanna see it, or you can't see it.
Also, they offer you the chance to read the EULA when signing up for MS services and you have to select "I Agree" to use it.
therefor, MS can pull the Xbox Live logs, use that as a proof somebody agreed to their terms of use for the LICENSE they give you.
besides, if there's anything waterproof at MS, it's their contracts and EULA's.
alternatively, they can request the accuser to show a proof of purchase.
since MS offers a limited 90-day warranty on most software in the US and Canada, you've only got 90 days to complain.
remember, this is MS we're talking about, they could even check the date the first halo 3 savegame was made and use that as proof.
too bad nobody RTFM's or the EULA's they get shown.
sorry mate, but MS does have 1 thing that's bulletproof and it's their legal department.
people used the game and the boxes and/or manuals read you have to agree to the EULA's, since they aren't allowed to play if they disagreed, they showed they agreed by playing because you must agree BEFORE playing, once you played there's no turning back.
the agreement has been made before the act, plain simple.
You actually believe Microsoft's legal department are invincible?? They lose legal cases all over the world, they are constantly making huge settlements.
Post by: gli7ch on December 09, 2007, 05:28:00 PM
Lawyers are not going to win...
Halo is not going to get refunded...
Post by: throwingks on December 09, 2007, 06:02:00 PM
Post by: Base8 on December 09, 2007, 07:41:00 PM
I'm gonna file a class action lawsuit for wasting everyones time..
Post by: limbfilter on December 09, 2007, 08:20:00 PM
Would anyone here be pissed if they bought a projector or a monitor that said it was nativly 720p and it turned out that it was actually 1152X640?
Would you keep it and use it?
Or would you return it?
Or would you contact the company?
Post by: djtonic on December 09, 2007, 08:42:00 PM
I love that alot of you are "upset" or "dissapointed" by halo 3 and love to call it halo 2.5 but still play it. Absolutely stupid.
The game looks sharp and plays awesome.
~Dj~
Post by: 88 Ecko Unltd 88 on December 09, 2007, 08:51:00 PM
Post by: luther349 on December 09, 2007, 09:37:00 PM
Post by: will2learn on December 09, 2007, 09:33:00 PM
My HDTV resets itself or the cable feed drops off every night-& its supposed to be HD. I guess if I was really stupid I could sue because I'm not getting a continuous HD stream.
I know how much lawyers charge (I know one very, very personally)-another frivolous & vexatious lawsuit that certainly doesn't serve the interest of the public-just like the many patent infringement cases that serve no useful purpose.
will2learn
Post by: xboxSlayer on December 09, 2007, 10:10:00 PM
I bought Super Mario Galaxy the other day and the graphics were pretty bad until I changed the standard cables to some third party componant cables and then it looked great. Point is that mabey some people need to upgrade from the standard equipement before they notice what a difference new cables make.
Post by: MustangSVT on December 09, 2007, 10:48:00 PM
If anything, this is one the least "false advertising" things out there in the world.
What about all those HD TV channels on cable/sat? A lot of times they show SD feed. Should I sue them too for not "false advertising"? Should I sue the people who make commercials like for cars or for HDTVs who respectively "falsely advertise" that like if you buy some car, every road will feel like a curvy road or in the case of HDTVs, that "every show" you watch will somehow magically be shown in full 1080p by your cable/sat provider? If anything, the 2 cases I just previously mentioned should be sued for false advertising rather than Bungie for Halo 3.
Post by: Mega_mil on December 09, 2007, 11:28:00 PM
Post by: Duuncan on December 10, 2007, 03:08:00 AM
QUOTE(radio5 @ Dec 9 2007, 08:28 AM)
Absolutely amazing. So I suppose all the people who are joining this class action lawsuit are going to hand over their copies of this "inferior" game due to the inexcusable absence of some pixels? People will do anything to earn a quick, dirty buck these days. Bungie has once again put out an amazing product and people have the nerve to try and stick it to them. And since this is the third installment of the Halo franchise, it's not like Joe Lawsuit didn't know what he was purchasing. It was necessary to maintain the framerate. Bungie won't ship anything less than excellence and it just blows my mind how ungrateful some "gamers" can be.
Well said! I saw no issue at all with the graphics personally.
Bungie has stated that the resolution was simply to keep the framerate up and still have the great lighting.
QUESTION: Do these people who are signing this lawsuit realise that if they win they could well destroy bungie?
Post by: 1nsan3 on December 10, 2007, 06:35:00 AM
QUOTE(appleman76 @ Dec 9 2007, 02:10 AM)
It still looks amazing. Get the f@*^ over it!
I sell you a car, i tell you i beefed the engine up pretty good, but actually i really didnt. But hey THE CAR LOOKS GOOD SO GET THE FUC* OVER IT right! your an easy one to screw over!! Bungie wants more people like you
Post by: ppazz13 on December 10, 2007, 07:24:00 AM
So everyone that is joining in on this lawsuit is saying that if Bungie had advertised the game at 640 lines of resolution rather than 720 lines, they would NOT have purchased it? It would have been the same price. In order to prove you deserve any compensation, you'd have to honestly say that you wouldn't have purchased the game knowing the true resolution.
Besides, I'm quite confident it'll get thrown out. The game is capable of being displayed at 720p. It's just "rendered" at a lower resolution before being scaled.
And to anyone that joins in on the lawsuit: You hereby forfeit any right to complain about rising costs of video games. It's idiots like you that drive up production costs.
Welcome to lawsuit-happy America.
Post by: Tazmanian_Devil on December 10, 2007, 06:58:00 AM
QUOTE(ppazz13 @ Dec 10 2007, 03:24 PM)
And to anyone that joins in on the lawsuit: You hereby forfeit any right to complain about rising costs of video games. It's idiots like you that drive up production costs.
Welcome to lawsuit-happy America.
Well said, its all the dicks that have nothing else better to do and would have never noticed the upscaling if it hadnt havve been pointed out to them. Thanks a lot you bunch of MUPPETS for the future increase in our game prices.
Post by: Eksyte on December 10, 2007, 07:53:00 AM
QUOTE(1nsan3 @ Dec 10 2007, 03:11 PM)
I sell you a car, i tell you i beefed the engine up pretty good, but actually i really didnt. But hey THE CAR LOOKS GOOD SO GET THE FUC* OVER IT right! your an easy one to screw over!! Bungie wants more people like you
Since you're talking about how a car performs and how the game looks, your analogy falls on its face because H3 plays fine.
This is more like seeing an ad for a bright red car but when you show up at the dealership to buy it, it's a little darker than it looks in the ad. Yes, it affects the appearance, but not in a debilitating manner. 99% of us would've still bought the car, just like 99% of people would've still bought H3, had Bungie been completely honest. After all, the graphics aren't the primary key to Halo's success.
Ya'll anal-retentive mofos are hilarious, as is this lawsuit.
Post by: iamjacksass on December 10, 2007, 08:37:00 AM
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 10 2007, 03:22 PM) 
I never said they're invincible, but here it's pretty obvious the whiners are gonna be the losers and MS is gonna be the winner.
thank you America, the land of the mass murderers, the school shootings and the ability to sue just about anyone, for yet again acting like asses and raising the global prices for just a tiny profit.
with yer bloody lawsuits all the time, just as annoying as the paranoia you have since 9/11.
I don't hate america, but I do think it needs to be said that the USA has a lot of morons walking their land.
besides, the jackasses are sueing the wrong company, bungie isn't the publisher who put on the box it's 720p but MS since they're the publishers who print the covers, handle the advertising and all, they are the ones doing false advertising, not bungie.
and in the end your 360 does give you the 720p video output.
Well not to be too pedantic but you said the legal department is bulletproof, pretty close to invincible to me.
Post by: cerealkillajme on December 10, 2007, 08:35:00 AM
QUOTE(Puffer @ Dec 9 2007, 02:15 AM)
I'm not sue happy, in fact, this is the first lawsuit I will have ever joined. However, I was very disappointed with the graphics in the game as it did seem very "blocky" at times when my tv overscanned to scale up to a 720p display. If they had been honest in the first place I would have been happy.
I had the same problem with GT4 on the PS2 and the constant jitter that occured when you started a race. We (gamers) wait a long time, and through several delays, for these games. The least the game companies could do is let us know the truth about the graphics we are about to spend 60 - 80 dollars on.
I even went so far as to buy the legendary edition and got scratched disks that MS never decided to replace for me. Just kinda bummed by the whole release. However I won't go so far as to say that it was a horrible game like some others. I thought it was a good story and a great play minus the graphics problems I had.
That was my only beef with the whole ordeal. I don't want to see Bungie go down, but I would like to see them get a nice slap for it. What most of you overlook is the fact that you were lied to, whether you want to believe it or not. Bungie wasn't going to tell you it wasn't true 720p for a second, the only reason we as consumers even know is that someone actually counted them. I don't want a refund for the game, nor do I want any money. I just would like to see companies stop pushing the consumer around. Bungie put out a game that didn't render in 720p and got busted for it. Had they actually came out and said that it wasn't 720p before it was released and given their reason for doing so, I wouldn't even mind it at all. Just the fact they tried to get over on all of us who bought the game by not delivering MS's standard 720p is BS, and most of you seem to not even care that you were lied to at all.
If we all continue to just sit back and not even care when companies lie to us and and try to pass a product off below the standard that it's supposed to meet what will happen in the future?
Post by: barman1176 on December 10, 2007, 09:44:00 AM
Just an opportunity for lowlifes to make backups and send the retail copy back is all that was. "YO I got me 35 bones for nuthin'!".
Post by: pingrr on December 10, 2007, 09:15:00 AM
Post by: hamwbone on December 10, 2007, 10:00:00 AM
QUOTE(pingrr @ Dec 10 2007, 10:51 AM)
This is fuckign stupid. So what if the game is 640. It is then upscaled to 720P. The botom line is you are seing a 720P image on your screen when you play the game
WRONG
Post by: sirsmacketh on December 10, 2007, 11:50:00 AM
Post by: MrFish on December 10, 2007, 11:19:00 AM
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 11:26 PM)
Not entirely correct: on the box it says you MUST agree to the enclosed EULA in either the manual or enclosed booklet if you want to use the software, if you don't agree you should return it to the retailer you bought it from.
No it doesn't; you're thinking of Windows and Excel.
On Halo 3 it says
"For use only with Xbox 360 entertainment systems with a PAL designation and PAL TVs capable of displaying a 60Hz signal. See xbox.com for details. Unauthorised copying, reverse engineering, transmission, public performance, rental, pay for play, or circumvention of copy protection is strictly prohibited
Xbox Live System Requirements with Xbox 360 system and games: Paid membership required for online play. Some Xbox Live services and downloads require additional hardware (e.g. headset and camera) and fees. Features may change without notice. Subject to terms of use: www.xbox.com/live/termsofuse.htm. Broadband Internet service and a Microsoft Passport account required. While most broadband Internet services will work with Xbox Live, some may not; check with your service provider. Xbox Live is not available in all countries, please to go www.xbox.com and select your country for details."
No mention of having to agree to an EULA. It mentions that LIVE has a contract, but (as we all know) it's a clickwrap, not an implied. You need to "I Agree" to it, not just pop the game in having read (or not) the box.
But hell, refute me: you don't even need to supply a box scan. A simple copy of this 'Halo 3 EULA' would suffice. I mean, if it's a binding contract, the text of it must exist somewhere, right?
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 11:26 PM)
it's like having to sign a nondisclosure contract before being allowed to see classified information: you MUST agree to shut up if you wanna see it, or you can't see it.
No, it's nothing like an NDA (and I've signed one or two in my day), because if you don't sign an NDA, nothing happens (except perhaps a polite invitation to vacate the premises). They certainly don't go 'whoops, well, whatever', and show you their trade secrets anyway. Whereas if you don't sign this magical imaginary Halo 3 license, and just put the game in your drive, then *shock* it lets you play Halo 3.
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 11:26 PM)
Also, they offer you the chance to read the EULA when signing up for MS services and you have to select "I Agree" to use it.
therefor, MS can pull the Xbox Live logs, use that as a proof somebody agreed to their terms of use for the LICENSE they give you.
As I observed in the thing you're replying to, they do that when you sign up for Live, because they have to do that when you sign up for LIVE. If they could get by with an implied contract you don't have to "I Agree" to, don't you think they would have done so? Also, I urge you to actually read it (www.xbox.com/live/termsofuse.htm), and find the paragraph where it says you can't sue someone that isn't Microsoft over matters that don't pertain to Xbox LIVE. Or indeed any bit where it says anything about matters not pertaining to Xbox LIVE ("The Service").
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 11:26 PM)
alternatively, they can request the accuser to show a proof of purchase.
since MS offers a limited 90-day warranty on most software in the US and Canada, you've only got 90 days to complain.
remember, this is MS we're talking about, they could even check the date the first halo 3 savegame was made and use that as proof.
So companies get to decide their own statute of limitations now? Cool! I'll just offer a ninety-second warranty, and now no-one can sue me ever!
Warranties are in addition to, not a replacement of, your statutory rights*. As anyone that's done even an introductory course in law would know.
*(google it).
QUOTE(johnnyrico @ Dec 9 2007, 11:26 PM)
too bad nobody RTFM's or the EULA's they get shown.
sorry mate, but MS does have 1 thing that's bulletproof and it's their legal department.
people used the game and the boxes and/or manuals read you have to agree to the EULA's, since they aren't allowed to play if they disagreed, they showed they agreed by playing because you must agree BEFORE playing, once you played there's no turning back.
the agreement has been made before the act, plain simple.
Again, in case you're going to pull a tl;dr and only read my first and last sentences: simply post up Halo 3's EULA, and the whole world will know that you're right.
Post by: MrFish on December 10, 2007, 11:34:00 AM
QUOTE(peter0328 @ Dec 9 2007, 09:52 AM)
The people behind this lawsuit don't even have their facts straight. 720p is not 720 pixels, it is 921,600 pixels. 720p stands for 720 progressively scanned lines of picture. The same is true for their analysis of 640p, it is not 640 pixels but it is actually 819,200 pixels if the resolution is 1280x640. It is actually missing 80p or 102,400 pixels. This error should be fixed immediately if they actually want this lawsuit to be considered somewhat seriously.
Technically, analogue television standards don't actually have horizontal pixels. It's one long analogue line. "720p" means that every CRT must display* 720 lines, but the number of pixels in each line is entirely dependent on the hardware displaying it. That the DAC on the Xbox's end is updating 1280 times each line is merely a technicality. It's for this reason that DVD (and, indeed, television standards in general) won't list the horizontal resolution, but only the number of lines.
So what they're alleging is, in fact, correct: the vertical resolution (the height) is 640 pixels, not 720 pixels. To try to enumerate the pixels that the display standard doesn't, in fact, have would be an error.
Digital standards like HDMI do, of course, have horizontal pixels, but there are no HDTV specifications based off them yet.
*(or ignore, or sample into a framebuffer and then faff around with, depending on how cheap/modern they are)
Post by: xboxhaxorz on December 10, 2007, 11:42:00 AM
even now it still doesnt work for me
the fact is bungie only admitted it AFTER the information was released not before but after
the fact is it doest not compare to gears of war a game i hate to death but must admit it looks better
halo 3 came out after gow so it SHOULD be better
i would be happy with a simple upgrade patch, i dont want any money cause ill play the game if it looked ugly or not
if anybody says halo 3 looks better than gow please i repeat please go to the doctors and get some lasic surgery
Post by: MrFish on December 10, 2007, 12:18:00 PM
QUOTE(xboxmodder4life @ Dec 9 2007, 10:30 AM)
they use the two frame buffers so they can argue they actaully are giving you more then 720 vertical lines of resolution.
Hell, why stop counting at back buffers? Every triangle has a a good few lines of texture, and multiple render passes. That's easily a hundred lines per triangle. If HDR sophistry can get you 1280p, fallacious pixel shader arithmetic could net 9001000000p.
Post by: sunami88 on December 10, 2007, 12:44:00 PM
QUOTE(skEwb @ Dec 9 2007, 07:29 AM)
Why is everyone so surprised? If you go to a store and purchase a crucial drug for example that is used to keep you healthy and the drug says 200mg on the label but you instead get the wrong dose of 150mg and end up having health issues, why can't this apply to games? False advertising is false advertising period. I hope they win.
Ok, so I was going to read the entire thread before replying to any one thing/person, but congrats, you made me change my mind. You sir, are a moron.
If Halo 3's resolution is all thats keeping you alive/happy with your life: Kill yourself.
Play the game and love it? Keep playing. Play the game and hate it? Return it. But suing over a minimal amount of screen space? You're just out for money.
Post by: mercury187 on December 10, 2007, 01:04:00 PM
Post by: Chancer on December 10, 2007, 01:41:00 PM
Not one of you would return .
The game is massively popular for what it is and the sales figures show that.
Now if they were going to court for the frame rate and slowdown issues on PES2008 fair enough, but H3 plays great and the people signing on for this action are not so pissed off that they will give it up.
The resolution figures mean nothing if the game is addictive, playable and looks good. It does all those things.
Post by: DeMoN_DARREN on December 10, 2007, 01:18:00 PM
QUOTE(appleman76 @ Dec 9 2007, 09:10 AM)
It still looks amazing. Get the f@*^ over it!
quote
Post by: mercury187 on December 10, 2007, 01:55:00 PM
QUOTE(Chancer @ Dec 10 2007, 01:41 PM)
Instead of all this bullshit. What if everyone unhappy with Halo 3 was offered their money back to return the game?
Not one of you would return .
The game is massively popular for what it is and the sales figures show that.
Now if they were going to court for the frame rate and slowdown issues on PES2008 fair enough, but H3 plays great and the people signing on for this action are not so pissed off that they will give it up.
The resolution figures mean nothing if the game is addictive, playable and looks good. It does all those things.
Yes but its pretty lame to own a brand new LCD tv and then purchase a brand new video game that has standard definition-like black bars when you have more than 1 person play on your console. Thats my gripe. why should it make a difference if there are 2 people on your console, just cut the screen in half. That may not relate to the topic but to relate back to the topic and this post, having top of the line equipment and a video game that advertises as one but does not deliver then the creators should be punished. What if everyone advertised their games as high definition games and did not deliver either. I think this lawsuit is called for and should be a warning for future games to advertise them correctly and not throw a game out the door in sloppy condition.
This post has been edited by mercury187: Dec 10 2007, 09:58 PM
Post by: unistyle on December 10, 2007, 05:38:00 PM
Let me say this again.. I don't even care that the pixels aren't there, and I don't want anything for free, but even I'm not so blind as to not see what is wrong with what bungie did. this was definetly false advertising.
Post by: punkshot20 on December 10, 2007, 05:41:00 PM
QUOTE
XBOX360.
COD2 - 1280x720
COD3 - 630P?
COD4 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
Halo 3 -1152x640
PGR3 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
PGR4 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
PDZ - 1140x640
Ridge Racer 6 - 1440x810 (WTF?)
Gears of War - 1280x720
Bioshock - 1280x720
Skate - 1280x720 (2xAA)
GRAW2 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
TH:PG - 1280x720
Tomb Raider (legends?) - 1024x600
NBA street 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Virtua Tennis 3 - 1920x1080 (2xAA)
TH:P8 - 1040x585 (2xAA)
Jericho - 1280x720
FIFA08 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Forza 2 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Call of Juarez 1280x720
DiRT - 1280x720
Conan - 1024x576
VF5 - 1024x1024 (2xAA)
MotoGP3 - 1280x1024
Oblivion (non GOTY edition) 1024x600 (2xAA)
Oblivion (GOTY edition) 1280x720 (2xAA)
Assassin's Creed 1280x720 (2xAA)
Mass Effect (2xAA???)
Orange Box - 1280x720 (not sure about this, would love some clarification)
Viva Pinata - 1280x720 (2xAA)
MX vs ATV - 1280x720
WWE 1280x720
NFS Protstreet - 1280x720 (4xAA)
PS3.
GT:HD - 1280x720(2xAA) and 1440x1080
GT:5/GT:5P - 1280x720 (4xAA) and 1280x1080 (2xAA)
Superstar dust:HD - 1280x1080
Heavenly Sword - 1280x720 (4xAA)
Virtua Tennis 3 - 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Restiance Fall of Man - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Ninja Gaiden Sigma demo - 1280x720
Ridge Racer 7 demo - 1920x1080
Rub'a'dub demo - 1600x1080
The darkness demo - 1024x576
Blast Factor demo - 1920x1080
Full Auto 2 demo - 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Harry Potter - 1280x720 (2xAA) and 2560x720
Pixel Junk Racers - 1920x1080
Skate - 1536x864
GRAW 2 - 1280x720
TH:PG - 1024x600
Locroroco Cocoreccho - 1920x1080 (2XAA)
TH:P8 - 1280x720
Go Puzzle - 1920x1080
Sudoku - 1920x1080
Motorstorm 1280x720 (2xAA)
COD4 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
FIFA 08 - 1280x720
Jericho - 996x560
Uncharted - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Ratchet and Clank - 1280x720 (2xAA)
DiRT - 1280x720
F1 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
VF5 - 1024x1024
Def Jam:Icon 1152x648
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - 1920x1080
Transformers - 960x1080
Pirates of the Caribbean - 768x1080
Oblivion - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Timeshift 1280x720
Assassin's Creed 1280x720 (2xAA)
MX vs ATV - 1024x576
WWE - 640x720 (2xAA)
NFS Prostreet 1280x720 (2xQAA) (seems EA is finally pulling their weight)
COD2 - 1280x720
COD3 - 630P?
COD4 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
Halo 3 -1152x640
PGR3 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
PGR4 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
PDZ - 1140x640
Ridge Racer 6 - 1440x810 (WTF?)
Gears of War - 1280x720
Bioshock - 1280x720
Skate - 1280x720 (2xAA)
GRAW2 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
TH:PG - 1280x720
Tomb Raider (legends?) - 1024x600
NBA street 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Virtua Tennis 3 - 1920x1080 (2xAA)
TH:P8 - 1040x585 (2xAA)
Jericho - 1280x720
FIFA08 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Forza 2 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Call of Juarez 1280x720
DiRT - 1280x720
Conan - 1024x576
VF5 - 1024x1024 (2xAA)
MotoGP3 - 1280x1024
Oblivion (non GOTY edition) 1024x600 (2xAA)
Oblivion (GOTY edition) 1280x720 (2xAA)
Assassin's Creed 1280x720 (2xAA)
Mass Effect (2xAA???)
Orange Box - 1280x720 (not sure about this, would love some clarification)
Viva Pinata - 1280x720 (2xAA)
MX vs ATV - 1280x720
WWE 1280x720
NFS Protstreet - 1280x720 (4xAA)
PS3.
GT:HD - 1280x720(2xAA) and 1440x1080
GT:5/GT:5P - 1280x720 (4xAA) and 1280x1080 (2xAA)
Superstar dust:HD - 1280x1080
Heavenly Sword - 1280x720 (4xAA)
Virtua Tennis 3 - 1920x1080 (2xAA)
Restiance Fall of Man - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Ninja Gaiden Sigma demo - 1280x720
Ridge Racer 7 demo - 1920x1080
Rub'a'dub demo - 1600x1080
The darkness demo - 1024x576
Blast Factor demo - 1920x1080
Full Auto 2 demo - 1920x1080 (4xAA)
Harry Potter - 1280x720 (2xAA) and 2560x720
Pixel Junk Racers - 1920x1080
Skate - 1536x864
GRAW 2 - 1280x720
TH:PG - 1024x600
Locroroco Cocoreccho - 1920x1080 (2XAA)
TH:P8 - 1280x720
Go Puzzle - 1920x1080
Sudoku - 1920x1080
Motorstorm 1280x720 (2xAA)
COD4 - 1024x600 (2xAA)
FIFA 08 - 1280x720
Jericho - 996x560
Uncharted - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Ratchet and Clank - 1280x720 (2xAA)
DiRT - 1280x720
F1 - 1280x720 (2xAA)
VF5 - 1024x1024
Def Jam:Icon 1152x648
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance - 1920x1080
Transformers - 960x1080
Pirates of the Caribbean - 768x1080
Oblivion - 1280x720 (2xAA)
Timeshift 1280x720
Assassin's Creed 1280x720 (2xAA)
MX vs ATV - 1024x576
WWE - 640x720 (2xAA)
NFS Prostreet 1280x720 (2xQAA) (seems EA is finally pulling their weight)
Post by: mlmadmax on December 10, 2007, 08:50:00 PM
QUOTE(mercury187 @ Dec 10 2007, 12:55 PM)
Yes but its pretty lame to own a brand new LCD tv and then purchase a brand new video game that has standard definition-like black bars when you have more than 1 person play on your console. Thats my gripe. why should it make a difference if there are 2 people on your console, just cut the screen in half. That may not relate to the topic but to relate back to the topic and this post, having top of the line equipment and a video game that advertises as one but does not deliver then the creators should be punished. What if everyone advertised their games as high definition games and did not deliver either. I think this lawsuit is called for and should be a warning for future games to advertise them correctly and not throw a game out the door in sloppy condition.
The black bars are there on purpose, they are to allow the correct aspect ratio on a widescreen tv and they have nothing whatsoever to do with the games resolution. It was a choice by bunjie and while some may not prefer that way of doing it I think it is correct and actually prefer it to a zoomed in or stretched screen.
Post by: darth_jarret on December 11, 2007, 03:44:00 AM
QUOTE(xboxmodder4life @ Dec 9 2007, 03:30 AM)
they will never win this lawsuit
from bungie.net
they use the two frame buffers so they can argue they actaully are giving you more then 720 vertical lines of resolution. Even so the final output of the signal is up to 1080p is not misleading because the final output resolution is that. This is because the xbox360 upscales everything...So this lawsuit has absolutely no feet to stand on. These lawyers do not understand what a frame buffer is let alone how two work together so i doubt they will even be able to go after bungie when bungie brings in their lead programmer to explain to them in the most technical terms how this works. The lawyers obviousbly havent done their research at all.
from bungie.net
they use the two frame buffers so they can argue they actaully are giving you more then 720 vertical lines of resolution. Even so the final output of the signal is up to 1080p is not misleading because the final output resolution is that. This is because the xbox360 upscales everything...So this lawsuit has absolutely no feet to stand on. These lawyers do not understand what a frame buffer is let alone how two work together so i doubt they will even be able to go after bungie when bungie brings in their lead programmer to explain to them in the most technical terms how this works. The lawyers obviousbly havent done their research at all.
i was about to qoute that same article. and just cause I've always wanted to say this: HERE HERE!
Post by: xboxhaxorz on December 11, 2007, 01:11:00 PM
the fact is yes you were lied to but saying the game plays great is not an excuse any logical thinking person would realize that
if i am offered to return my game for 50$ i will not and saying those that do are driving production costs up for the next game hahahaha
2 points to that
there is no halo 4 at least im not aware of
they just made say $300 million tonite alone by releasing 3 measly maps
Post by: feflicker on December 12, 2007, 11:09:00 AM
Post by: Devedander on December 12, 2007, 11:43:00 AM
QUOTE(Chancer @ Dec 10 2007, 09:41 PM)
Instead of all this bullshit. What if everyone unhappy with Halo 3 was offered their money back to return the game?
Not one of you would return .
The game is massively popular for what it is and the sales figures show that.
Now if they were going to court for the frame rate and slowdown issues on PES2008 fair enough, but H3 plays great and the people signing on for this action are not so pissed off that they will give it up.
The resolution figures mean nothing if the game is addictive, playable and looks good. It does all those things.
Chancer that's a flawed supposition... not the same falacy but just as wrong as "do you want to fight Iraq now on their soil or wait until they are murdering kids in your back yard?".
This is where false advertising laws come into effect... you cannot knowingly advertise 15 ounces of something as 1 lb knowing that no one is going to bother driving back to the store to get a refund just because they are short 1 ounce.
Just because it's not wrong enough to go 100% the other way does not mean it should be acceptable and not met with punitive action.
Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of class action lawsuits in general as they pretty much end up benefiting the lawyers more than anything and raising the prices for the rest of us to compensate for the loss of the company, but the principle is right.
Don't blatantly mislabel something, it's a slippery slope, arguments can be made by any number of people on just how wrong it is... the point is it's wrong, not how wrong, not what would you do wrong, not bad enough to give up what you bought wrong, it's just not right and businesses laws are made so that sort of slippery slope is not stepped on.
I am sorry Chancer, I usually agree with your point of view on things but this time you are off base.
QUOTE(feflicker @ Dec 12 2007, 07:09 PM)
What's next, suing because you get 59fps instead of 60?
Or getting a 4 cylinder when you were sold a V6? Who cares! It still drives right! Come one!
So you paid for casmier and you got synthetic, so what! It keeps you warm right? It looks nice right?
You paid for fillet and got sirloin? Big deal, it's still meat, it's got protein, quit griping.
Yeah...
This post has been edited by Devedander: Dec 12 2007, 07:49 PM
Post by: LockAndLoad on December 12, 2007, 02:41:00 PM
QUOTE(Chancer @ Dec 10 2007, 01:41 PM)
Instead of all this bullshit. What if everyone unhappy with Halo 3 was offered their money back to return the game?
Not one of you would return .
The game is massively popular for what it is and the sales figures show that.
Now if they were going to court for the frame rate and slowdown issues on PES2008 fair enough, but H3 plays great and the people signing on for this action are not so pissed off that they will give it up.
The resolution figures mean nothing if the game is addictive, playable and looks good. It does all those things.
Pardon my opinion, but most of your statement is based on pure opinion!! Yes, the game is popular, but resolution means nothing?!?!?...So, exactly what resolution WOULD actually be low enough to go and ask for your money back? 1224x768? 800x600? How about a good old 640x480? There is a point to where your gonna say, "Holy criminy giblets this game looks like a$$!!". That is YOUR breaking point. Many gamers however have a much more attuned eye, if you will. Hey I am by no means an expert, but you just gotta ask yourself the question, after you play 2 hours of COD 4 then pop in H3, "Why in the hell DOES H3 look so far inferior to COD 4?".
Post by: Chancer on December 12, 2007, 03:05:00 PM
QUOTE(LockAndLoad @ Dec 12 2007, 10:17 PM)
Pardon my opinion, but most of your statement is based on pure opinion!! Yes, the game is popular, but resolution means nothing?!?!?...So, exactly what resolution WOULD actually be low enough to go and ask for your money back? 1224x768? 800x600? How about a good old 640x480? There is a point to where your gonna say, "Holy criminy giblets this game looks like a$$!!". That is YOUR breaking point. Many gamers however have a much more attuned eye, if you will. Hey I am by no means an expert, but you just gotta ask yourself the question, after you play 2 hours of COD 4 then pop in H3, "Why in the hell DOES H3 look so far inferior to COD 4?".
Everybody bought this game in droves (not me I don't like Halo). These very forums were full of hundreds of people telling us all how great this game was " better than anything about" and now suddenly because a bunch of get rich quick lawyers see a public body to ride, to get rich, you all think it's crap. 90 percent of the people would not even know the resolution was less than advertised or even care. The difference between the actual and advertised resolution is not huge either so don't act like it is in Monochrome or something.
You all begged for it's release, You all said how good it was and now it's not and looks shit over 80p difference.
Pissing public money out on action like this is way over the top. The game does still look great. I have watched my mates play.
Problem is everyone these days wants to make a fast buck and ultimately the general public pays for ridiculous courtroom battles.
I suggest you all take your copies back and demand a refund as you have been mis- sold the goods. After all it's crap isn't it?
Post by: skEwb on December 12, 2007, 04:42:00 PM
QUOTE(sunami88 @ Dec 10 2007, 03:20 PM)
Ok, so I was going to read the entire thread before replying to any one thing/person, but congrats, you made me change my mind. You sir, are a moron.
If Halo 3's resolution is all thats keeping you alive/happy with your life: Kill yourself.
Play the game and love it? Keep playing. Play the game and hate it? Return it. But suing over a minimal amount of screen space? You're just out for money.
The Halo 3 resolution is not what's keeping me happy and alive. I enjoyed the game just as much as anyone else did. I'm simply siding with the people filing the suit for false advertisement. If you had bothered to read it maybe you'd have more knowledge on the issue as well, but you decide to keep writing in your ignorant ways.
First you agree there is a "minimal amount of space" screen taken away then you're so angry people are filing a lawsuit over it ? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) You just made my point even more apparent. Thanks!
Almost forgot.. you're saying play the game and return it if you're not happy? Most places don't take back already opened games, that's why people want to be compensated via lawsuit and to also prevent this from being used by future game devs.
This post has been edited by skEwb: Dec 13 2007, 12:44 AM
Post by: gcskate27 on December 12, 2007, 07:26:00 PM
Post by: Foe-hammer on December 13, 2007, 10:58:00 AM
QUOTE(LockAndLoad @ Dec 12 2007, 03:17 PM)
... but you just gotta ask yourself the question, after you play 2 hours of COD 4 then pop in H3, "Why in the hell DOES H3 look so far inferior to COD 4?".
CoD4 support a lower native resolution then Halo 3, at 1024 x 600. This was discovered by the same guy who busted Halo 3 for being 1152 x 640.
http://forum.beyond3...950#post1089950
So your point being? This just proves that you and most others cannot even discern the difference when a game is at lower native resolution then 720p. Plus there is many games that do support a native resolution lower then 720p. The only reason Halo 3 is singled out and made such a big fuss over is because of its high profile.