Random Gaming News and Videos Topic

Status
Not open for further replies.
I got burnt out at lvl 29(?) or so with just the Titan. However, if you've put 800+ hrs into the game I'd say that you have got your $60 worth.
 
Another f-ing week with no burns on the nightfall. If this and the big weapons nerf patch are Bungie's future plans for extending the life of the game, I can't imagine they'll have many people still playing by summer.
 
Last edited:
I am idle a lot and I do play often so I dunno how long I actually played but know my hours should be high.


3 32's for awhile and every item I want.
My issue is the game needs more gear/weapons and how some times it taking months to get certain loot for some.
 
VaLLiancE said:
...My issue is the game needs more gear/weapons and how some times it taking months to get certain loot for some.
Click to expand...

That is my biggest gripe with Destiny, I was getting dicked on loot. Everyone in my Fireteam would get some decent to really good loot after a Strike/Challenge or crucible match and is get sh!t MilkManX can attest to it. It really started to sour the experience for me :(
 
Last week, after finishing two of the least enjoyable nightfalls I'd experienced, I got shards and some piece of garbage legendary sniper. I don't know how anyone can call this a "loot" game. I find better drops than that in 5 minutes of playing Diablo 3.
 
I have all the exotics that I want. I am after the hardest loot to get. The faction shaders, and ships. I am currently stockpiling faction packages at the Postmaster. I use a character for each faction. I currently have 8 New Monarchy packages, 9 Future War Cult packages, and 9 Dead Orbit packages. When I hit 17 packages on each I am going to open them and make yt videos for each. Assuming I get something rare.
 
u2popmofo said:
Last week, after finishing two of the least enjoyable nightfalls I'd experienced, I got shards and some piece of garbage legendary sniper. I don't know how anyone can call this a "loot" game. I find better drops than that in 5 minutes of playing Diablo 3.
Click to expand...

Agreed. What I don't like about the weapons/gear is they all have the same base stats, with a few random buffs. I would have liked it better if the equipment were randomly generated (such as in BL2), that way there would be some truly unique items, and you could better facilitate trading of gear without breaking the game so easily.
 
Yeah, I hit that wall before the DLC came out and I had pre-ordered it. I don't see me ever going back to it. I'll reconsider when the sequel launches. There's just too many other games I rather play than to continue the grindfest which Destiny is.

I do miss the teamwork and conversations we had while playing the Raids though.
 
u2popmofo said:
Another f-ing week with no burns on the nightfall. If this and the big weapons nerf patch are Bungie's future plans for extending the life of the game, I can't imagine they'll have many people still playing by summer.
Click to expand...

You have Icebreaker now so stop complaining. :tounge:

I’ll bet burns will be back with future nightfall activities. This week’s against Valus won’t be difficult we just have to play it safe. Also, no need to have three Warlocks on a team if we intend to run it with our alt classes. We need to mix it up with a spread of different classes to be more efficient.
 
BUSTERMAN said:
You have Icebreaker now so stop complaining. :tounge:

I’ll bet burns will be back with future nightfall activities. This week’s against Valus won’t be difficult we just have to play it safe. Also, no need to have three Warlocks on a team if we intend to run it with our alt classes. We need to mix it up with a spread of different classes to be more efficient.
Click to expand...

I look forward to firing my bullets into his sponge face for 20 mins.
 
360x200

Bethesda's lawyers are feeling restless again, demanding that an indie developer change the name of their game over an infringement of its Fallout trademark.

BluBox Games had been working on Fortress Fallout with Jordan Maron - a.k.a. prominent YouTuber "CaptainSparklerz" - since August 2014. While BluBox's debut project is a 2D, multiplayer, freemium strategy game, lawyers working on behalf of Bethesda took issue with an application to trademark the title.

According to a letter received by Maron last week, Bethesda's parent company, ZeniMax, believes it would infringe on the trademark for its multimillion-selling, third-person, open-world RPG franchise, Fallout. In a video posted to YouTube, Maron outlined the two choices available to Xreal: stand and fight, or give in, though in reality there is scarcely a choice at all.

"We chatted with our lawyers, and they said, 'Yeah, Bethesda is a notoriously litigious company.' Meaning that they do not hesitate to file a lawsuit against people infringing their trademarks, and they also have lots of money, which I and my partner don't really have at the moment," he said.

"So, essentially, we're being strong-armed into having to change our name... Which is unfortunate, because I personally do not feel that there's any confusion between Fortress Fallout and the Fallout game franchise. I don't believe that people would see Fortress Fallout on the App Store and say, 'Hey, it must be a sequel in the Fallout series.'"

When one considers the Fortress Fallout screenshot below, it's not difficult to see Maron's point.
Click to expand...
4a53be730c6d978f1805fee2cee8bda5_screen_1024x640.png

Maron drew a comparison to a similar situation from 2012 involving Mojang's Scrolls, which ZeniMax claimed would infringe on its Elder Scrolls trademark. In that case, the two companies settled on Mojang keeping the name if it didn't apply for a trademark. However, for Xreal, even that much legal back-and-forth is well beyond its available resources.

"It's pretty silly," Maron concluded, before erupting into mock-applause. "Congratulations Bethesda. You won. You beat us. You exercised your might."

We fully expect that Maron will receive a letter about infringement of the Might & Magic trademark in due course.
Click to expand...

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...ggers-trademark-dispute-over-fortress-fallout

Wow, that sucks. Does anybody else do this? It just comes across as monopoly-esque, except the monopoly is on specific words.
 
"Bethesda's parent company." A key word. We can't blame Bethesda particularly for this given the current information. Tragic situation nonetheless.
 
I'll actually side with Bethesda on this one (though not on going after someone for "Scrolls," that's too generic). The "Fallout" brand is pretty big. I can understand their concerns.
 
Love CaptainSparkles.

Meanwhile Bethesda continues to be the worst game development company on the planet. Yet people keep buying up titles that belong on Windows 98.
 
Anderson said:
I'll actually side with Bethesda on this one (though not on going after someone for "Scrolls," that's too generic). The "Fallout" brand is pretty big. I can understand their concerns.
Click to expand...
Can't say I do. I could perhaps see it if the game used both the name and/or a very similar concept to the Fallout series, but it's obvious that isn't the case here.The name Fallout doesn't necessarily imply the same thing and falls under a much more generic blanket. Just like Scrolls and Elder Scrolls. Different game genres, fantasy setting for sure, but they have the right to stop anyone from using the word scroll? It comes across as exploitation of a trademark system in desperate need of an update.
 
I have to side with the indie dev. I would understand if its release was right around the time of a Bethesda Fallout game, but not in this case.

I think a fair compromise would be for Bethesda to compensate the dev for time and effort in the renaming, but I don't think the indie dev should be legally bound to comply.
 
Anderson said:
I'll actually side with Bethesda on this one (though not on going after someone for "Scrolls," that's too generic). The "Fallout" brand is pretty big. I can understand their concerns.
Click to expand...

Can't agree. I don't see how the use of the word "Fallout" in all forms should belong to Bethesda just because they sold a bunch of games. It's called Fortress Fallout, 2d, and looks and plays nothing like Fallout. I doubt if it went to court, it would be upheld.
 
Frozpot said:
Can't agree. I don't see how the use of the word "Fallout" in all forms should belong to Bethesda just because they sold a bunch of games. It's called Fortress Fallout, 2d, and looks and plays nothing like Fallout. I doubt if it went to court, it would be upheld.
Click to expand...

I think they'd win. It is a single word that represents a powerful brand in the industry. Ask any gamer about "Fallout," and they know exactly what you mean. Bethesda paid a ton of money for the Fallout license and is not going to just let other devs use the word without fighting for it. Think of "Halo," for instance. Does the Bungie legal department let other game devs use "Halo" in their game titles without contesting it?
 
Anderson said:
I think they'd win. It is a single word that represents a powerful brand in the industry. Ask any gamer about "Fallout," and they know exactly what you mean. Bethesda paid a ton of money for the Fallout license and is not going to just let other devs use the word without fighting for it. Think of "Halo," for instance. Does the Bungie legal department let other game devs use "Halo" in their game titles without contesting it?
Click to expand...

Their game is not called "Fallout", though. Their licence is for the "Fallout" brand, not the Word Fallout, though they do get it in context of the game. If the indie game was simply called "Fallout" then I would agree with you. I'd even agree if they had made a post-apocalyptic theme.

There is no way someone could confuse the two as being related at all.

Same for "Halo". If someone made a tween-age girl-power game called "Halo Girl", then I wouldn't expect MS to get very far in contesting it.
 
Frozpot said:
Their game is not called "Fallout", though. Their licence is for the "Fallout" brand, not the Word Fallout, though they do get it in context of the game. If the indie game was simply called "Fallout" then I would agree with you. I'd even agree if they had made a post-apocalyptic theme.

There is no way someone could confuse the two as being related at all.

Same for "Halo". If someone made a tween-age girl-power game called "Halo Girl", then I wouldn't expect MS to get very far in contesting it.
Click to expand...

They'd probably win.

If companies let anyone use their name brand or trademark, they are going to hurt their company and investment. The brand gets watered down, you lose quality control, and your public image gets hurt. That's what copyright, branding, and trademark laws are designed to protect against. There are a lot of those laws. I agree that there isn't much similarity between this game and a standard Fallout game, but I think this case is about protecting a copyrighted, trademarked brand name (and also about establishing legal precedent for other cases down the road).

I'm not a lawyer, of course, and I could be wrong. But that's how I see it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back