The developers of Marvel Rivals apologize for including some controversial requirements in order to access the game's Alpha test.
With such a broad scope on what counts as “disparagement,” this has caused quite a stir among the community, with some players being banned without realizing the terms of this contract. The developers released a statement addressing these terms, with NetEase saying it is aware of the “inappropriate and misleading terms” regarding the non-disparagement clause to access Marvel Rivals’ closed alpha, and apologized for any miscommunication. The developers state that they are open to both suggestions and criticisms about the game, wishing to make Marvel Rivals better and satisfy gamers.
The conditions of the contract are also going to be revised, with progress being shared with every content creator.
I am surprised it was NetEase, as these kinds of policies are basically always from Japanese companies. Japan’s defamation laws are literal garbage that basically just protect big companies and abusers, so seeing a similar kind of clause from a non-Japanese company is quite strange. I mean, imagine a country whose defamation laws don’t care if something being said is true or not, if it damages the reputation of something even if it is true, then Japan’s law considers it defamation. Garbage.
I play some NetEase games (most notably Super Mecha Champions, its on Steam) and I have honestly been surprised that they are so welcoming of feedback. Most of their games literally have an option in the menus of the games to send feedback to the developers, positive or negative. They are fast to act on reports I have sent, and generally have been vastly less hatable than Tencent. So seeing that this happened was a shock to me. Glad they’re correcting the problem though.
Even that doesn’t make sense though. How would people not have caught on when they were banning people but not telling them what for other than you violated some terms of service agreement?
The obvious next step would be to actually go look at the agreement.
So this outcome was 100% inevitable, and moreover 100% predictable. How else could it possibly have gone down.
I never understand how these companies work. Aren’t they just getting portrayed even more negatively now? Sometimes I wonder if it’s just AI making these decisions behind the screen.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
I am surprised it was NetEase, as these kinds of policies are basically always from Japanese companies. Japan’s defamation laws are literal garbage that basically just protect big companies and abusers, so seeing a similar kind of clause from a non-Japanese company is quite strange. I mean, imagine a country whose defamation laws don’t care if something being said is true or not, if it damages the reputation of something even if it is true, then Japan’s law considers it defamation. Garbage.
I play some NetEase games (most notably Super Mecha Champions, its on Steam) and I have honestly been surprised that they are so welcoming of feedback. Most of their games literally have an option in the menus of the games to send feedback to the developers, positive or negative. They are fast to act on reports I have sent, and generally have been vastly less hatable than Tencent. So seeing that this happened was a shock to me. Glad they’re correcting the problem though.
“I’m sorry we got caught on this.”
Even that doesn’t make sense though. How would people not have caught on when they were banning people but not telling them what for other than you violated some terms of service agreement?
The obvious next step would be to actually go look at the agreement.
So this outcome was 100% inevitable, and moreover 100% predictable. How else could it possibly have gone down.
They were not misleading or miscommunicated terms. They literally banned negative subjective reviews.
So now they’re guilty of both controlling reviewers, and lying.
I never understand how these companies work. Aren’t they just getting portrayed even more negatively now? Sometimes I wonder if it’s just AI making these decisions behind the screen.
That’s what you get when you go with a company like netease or tencent