I'm getting a lot of mixed information right now so take what I say now as rumours until there's official news:
There is theory this actually Steam flexing their muscles essentially taking the game off the countries where PSN aren't available to ensure THEY aren't legally responsible in any way if any lawsuits happen because of this (Sony can say ToS but that means shit in an actual court case) and keep the hate directed at Sony. Supporting this is rumours that Steam is offering refunds for ALL affected players of PSN denied countries.
I've also heard that apparently they may be no longer making it a requirement for PSN to play Helldivers 2 in those countries, but if they don't need to do it because they CAN'T get PSN, why enforce this at all?
A lot of the information coming out suggests this was at least 90% Sony because guess what's coming up later this month? The investor calls about how the company is doing so my guess, some over zealous executives tried to strong arm the Helldiver players to join PSN to pad their numbers before the call, not expecting or caring for this reaction.
If that's the case it pisses me off more as ANOTHER example of Sony mismanagement when you could've simply offered a 'PlayStation exclusive cosmetic bundle if you join and link for free with PSN' with ZERO backlash, this might have shaken trust so much that you killed a cash cow game.
True but if the removal WAS done by Steam, this could be not just protecting themselves legally but also opportunistic retaliation and setting a line in the sand.
In the past, I don't think Steam had the leverage or power to tell publishers not to do that for fear of losing games being published on their site.
Current day, we see how MASSIVELY bad all game studios and publishers are doing financially thanks to both ideological decisions and mismanagement. Might be the perfect opportunity to do this now right when Sony made the biggest blunder with a once praised game when they have the maximum leverage and Sony have little to retaliate against since their other games have been suffering thanks to their mismanagement.
If the removal was done by Steam, it opens Steam up to a lawsuit from the publisher. For a non-valid reason, they restricted it to a number of countries for their own business gain at the cost of the second party's income. That is a form of tortuous interference, and Steam would be liable for all the refunds and all the lost potential sales.
Steam is stupid, and has more than a few danger-hair DIE types, but I don't think they're quite so terminally stupid as to do that.
Not that I know the finer points of business or contract law—or whatever contract Steam may have in place specifically—but I would think "you made it so that the people here literally cannot use this product, we cannot sell it to them because of that" should be a valid reason.
"We aren't obligated to continue to sell a non-functioning product that could open us up to legal liabilities" should be somewhere in Steam's contract, one would think.
It's a Sony published game but Steam is just too big a market anymore so they thought they'd use it to try to drive traffic back to psn and whoops it backfired.
You underestimate the blindness in the exec and exec ass-licking class at all the tech companies.
I guarantee that some internal pitch said, we can get everyone signed in, and then use 'AI' with their info to.... $$$$
The execs across the board are chasing always online data slurping to get in on AI, and damned be choice or privacy or legality because we have fuck you money.
Totally agree. Microsoft is trying to force you to use a Microsoft account to sign in. Everybody wants you to sign in. Their shit services competing to sell our info. I can't even adjust my headphones' settings without logging in to some craptastic Arctis account.
I was seeing that opposite. Threads posted less than 30 minutes after it was removed from those countries lead everyone to believe that Sony had manually done so after it was pointed out to them that it was a problem with possible legal ramifications.
Also games that are removed from Steam entirely often get "refund guaranteed" status for people who bought them, so that's likely why all those countries are getting that shit instantly.
'PlayStation exclusive cosmetic bundle if you join and link for free with PSN' with ZERO backlash
Considering they did that with Spiderman already and it did in fact have zero backlash, I'm guessing the numbers who did it weren't enough for them.
Considering they did that with Spiderman already and it did in fact have zero backlash, I'm guessing the numbers who did it weren't enough for them.
Which Spiderman game as if it was the first one then I'd be surprised if they didn't get at least 10% getting PSN accounts unless thanks to their security being shit their reputation is too bad.
If it's the second where we had butterface MJ and more push on Miles, yeah I can see less joining off that.
The premise of your argument is that investors are bumbling morons who have no idea how things work and if you just wiggle big numbers in front of them then they will go "oooh ahhh" and just keep pouring in money.
I would imagine a single investor have enough grey matter to stand up and ask:
"You wiggle the surge of new PSN accounts but I also noticed you forced PSN requirement in place that didn't need it before. Am I supposed to interpret that as some promise of future PS+ subscriptions?"
People still invest in Disney 'subverting' old established franchises when they actually list recently to a re-release of the Phantom Menace to celebrate 25 years since it released....
There ARE a lot of investors who don't fully understand the industries they invest in only 'want number go up', it's why we constantly have bubbles from the live streaming bubble to in gaming everyone rushing for a live service despite them having the highest failure rates.
I'm getting a lot of mixed information right now so take what I say now as rumours until there's official news:
There is theory this actually Steam flexing their muscles essentially taking the game off the countries where PSN aren't available to ensure THEY aren't legally responsible in any way if any lawsuits happen because of this (Sony can say ToS but that means shit in an actual court case) and keep the hate directed at Sony. Supporting this is rumours that Steam is offering refunds for ALL affected players of PSN denied countries.
I've also heard that apparently they may be no longer making it a requirement for PSN to play Helldivers 2 in those countries, but if they don't need to do it because they CAN'T get PSN, why enforce this at all?
A lot of the information coming out suggests this was at least 90% Sony because guess what's coming up later this month? The investor calls about how the company is doing so my guess, some over zealous executives tried to strong arm the Helldiver players to join PSN to pad their numbers before the call, not expecting or caring for this reaction.
If that's the case it pisses me off more as ANOTHER example of Sony mismanagement when you could've simply offered a 'PlayStation exclusive cosmetic bundle if you join and link for free with PSN' with ZERO backlash, this might have shaken trust so much that you killed a cash cow game.
True but if the removal WAS done by Steam, this could be not just protecting themselves legally but also opportunistic retaliation and setting a line in the sand.
In the past, I don't think Steam had the leverage or power to tell publishers not to do that for fear of losing games being published on their site.
Current day, we see how MASSIVELY bad all game studios and publishers are doing financially thanks to both ideological decisions and mismanagement. Might be the perfect opportunity to do this now right when Sony made the biggest blunder with a once praised game when they have the maximum leverage and Sony have little to retaliate against since their other games have been suffering thanks to their mismanagement.
If the removal was done by Steam, it opens Steam up to a lawsuit from the publisher. For a non-valid reason, they restricted it to a number of countries for their own business gain at the cost of the second party's income. That is a form of tortuous interference, and Steam would be liable for all the refunds and all the lost potential sales.
Steam is stupid, and has more than a few danger-hair DIE types, but I don't think they're quite so terminally stupid as to do that.
Not that I know the finer points of business or contract law—or whatever contract Steam may have in place specifically—but I would think "you made it so that the people here literally cannot use this product, we cannot sell it to them because of that" should be a valid reason.
"We aren't obligated to continue to sell a non-functioning product that could open us up to legal liabilities" should be somewhere in Steam's contract, one would think.
It's a Sony published game but Steam is just too big a market anymore so they thought they'd use it to try to drive traffic back to psn and whoops it backfired.
You underestimate the blindness in the exec and exec ass-licking class at all the tech companies.
I guarantee that some internal pitch said, we can get everyone signed in, and then use 'AI' with their info to.... $$$$
The execs across the board are chasing always online data slurping to get in on AI, and damned be choice or privacy or legality because we have fuck you money.
Totally agree. Microsoft is trying to force you to use a Microsoft account to sign in. Everybody wants you to sign in. Their shit services competing to sell our info. I can't even adjust my headphones' settings without logging in to some craptastic Arctis account.
I was seeing that opposite. Threads posted less than 30 minutes after it was removed from those countries lead everyone to believe that Sony had manually done so after it was pointed out to them that it was a problem with possible legal ramifications.
Also games that are removed from Steam entirely often get "refund guaranteed" status for people who bought them, so that's likely why all those countries are getting that shit instantly.
Considering they did that with Spiderman already and it did in fact have zero backlash, I'm guessing the numbers who did it weren't enough for them.
Which Spiderman game as if it was the first one then I'd be surprised if they didn't get at least 10% getting PSN accounts unless thanks to their security being shit their reputation is too bad.
If it's the second where we had butterface MJ and more push on Miles, yeah I can see less joining off that.
Spider-Man 2 isn't on Steam yet.
Ah ok, so maybe Sony's security reputation is so shit it's a barrier for PC players to join PSN.
Oh, like when Total War gives you a professional mod in exchange for your email address.
Yep. Several pieces of DLC for the Warhammer games can only be obtained through creating an account with them.
I have to say, I never had a problem with this before. I think I kind of lost the thread what we're supposed to be upset about, lol
Here's what I don't though.
The investors.
The premise of your argument is that investors are bumbling morons who have no idea how things work and if you just wiggle big numbers in front of them then they will go "oooh ahhh" and just keep pouring in money.
I would imagine a single investor have enough grey matter to stand up and ask:
"You wiggle the surge of new PSN accounts but I also noticed you forced PSN requirement in place that didn't need it before. Am I supposed to interpret that as some promise of future PS+ subscriptions?"
People still invest in Disney 'subverting' old established franchises when they actually list recently to a re-release of the Phantom Menace to celebrate 25 years since it released....
There ARE a lot of investors who don't fully understand the industries they invest in only 'want number go up', it's why we constantly have bubbles from the live streaming bubble to in gaming everyone rushing for a live service despite them having the highest failure rates.
Damn... the world really is ruled by rich morons isn't it?