Shit, where will they find the $700 to cover this?!
Bug me in the PSN thread or PM or something, but with "good enough" cards you can counter those
What the fuck.
Shit, where will they find the $700 to cover this?!
Yeah, but that's clear as rain that there has to be a Vita version of the game that supports cross-play.
If people did any fucking research these ads wouldn't be misleading.
Cross-play was never explained as being the same as Remote Play.
Some PS3 games have Vita versions, and the save file is compatible between the two.
It's not rocket surgery.
True Fact: Sony only sold 14 total Vitas at launch.
Truer Fact: SmokyDave bought all of them.
Ugh. I literally missed the deadline for this by a few days (bought mine mid-June).
I did think it was pretty sleazy of them at the time to imply that the 3G model of the system could play online via 3G when it was limited to just stuff like checking out leaderboards.
Wow. I never even knew this. What was the point if the 3G model again? Ugh.
As part of its settlement with the FTC, Sony is barred from making similarly misleading advertising claims in the future, and will provide consumers who bought a PS Vita gaming console before June 1, 2012, either a $25 cash or credit refund, or a $50 merchandise voucher for select video games, and/or services. Sony will provide notice via email to consumers who are eligible for redress after the settlement is finalized by the Commission.
Just kill the Vita already.
Did you seriously just call every person who may have thought the feature worked....an IDIOT?
Wow. I never even knew this. What was the point if the 3G model again? Ugh.
It's like a mandated Ambassador's Program!
That's not really false though. Cross-save functionality is legitimately there, transferring your PS3 save to your Vita version, and the 3G portion pertains to Near. I guess it could be misinterpreted, but it says cross-save right there.They are suing them over this
http://www.business.ftc.gov/blog/20...claims-playstation-vita-and-tweets-deutsch-la
Just kill the Vita already.
I know, it's not like the USA's FTC is quick to stomp on corporate interests. We all thought the early ads showing what was strongly implied to be people playing online multiplayer over 3g was really pushing it. What it was actually was two people playing async mission challenges sent over 3g while glaring at each other; you'd have to know a lot about that specific game to know it wasn't online.the defenders are particularly silly in this thread. i am enjoying it.
Is this US only? Canada here
But look at the picture - it specifically shows the game being played on a TV, and then arrows going both way showing the exact same game screen on the Vita, as if they just paused the PS3 game and continued on Vita. That is not possible, thus it's misleading, which is what this is all about. It's not saying they lied to customers, but that they mislead customers.
Just kill the Vita already.
What were the claims they didn't deliver on?
What didn't they deliver on? Bought my Vita at launch and it's been everything I thought it was advertised as....
For example, the popular PS3 game Killzone 3 was featured in a Sony video about remote play, but was never playable remotely on the Vita and very few, if any, games of a similar size and complexity worked with the remote play feature.
You mean like the part that says "Play on your PS3 system and then continue your game on the go with PS Vita"? That sounds to me like you are playing a game and then continuing it on your Vita, not playing a complete baseball game, then saving, and playing another, different baseball game in your Vita. Nobody thinks of continuing a baseball game that way. Maybe if it said "continue your season on the go..." or something.Do people not reading anymore? Reading comprehension is key here. Do people go through life as if reading a picture book?
Is this US only? Canada here
Quick, what's 50x0?The company must also refund $25 in cash or credit or a $50 merchandise voucher to anyone who bought a Vita before June 1, 2012.
Is the UK regulated by the FTC? It would require a similarly adjudicated case in the UKDoes this apply to us UK folk? Would be nice to get some free pennies towards a game.
No, that's the save file being transferred from where you lasted progressed. How can anyone mis interpret that!?But look at the picture - it specifically shows the game being played on a TV, and then arrows going both way showing the exact same game screen on the Vita, as if they just paused the PS3 game and continued on Vita. That is not possible, thus it's misleading, which is what this is all about. It's not saying they lied to customers, but that they mislead customers.
And I remember at the time thinking that most PS3 games would be playable over remote play over the internet, with the Vita controlling the PS3. I thought of buying the Vita just for that (and had I done so, I would have been sorely disappointed). Sony made the Vita sound so much better than it ended up being (it's still a great little system, but Sony overhyped its abilities).
In the 5th grade, my teacher gave the class a quiz and said to "read the instructions." All we had to do was answer one question out of many. Only 1 or 2 people passed (read the instructions). No body reads the terms and agreements anymore either.Do people not reading anymore? Reading comprehension is key here. Do people go through life as if reading a picture book?
fuck yes!!! Will easily take the credit though.
Does this apply to us UK folk? Would be nice to get some free pennies towards a game.