Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 160 posts

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#121

Post by mrguyorama »

stevehawk wrote: post #29
Spivak wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that online gaming chat is really really toxic . It's one of those things where christian mothers were right about video games but wrong about why. It turns out that artificial violence and guns and sex aren't some big corrupting influence but hanging around assholes for the majority of your leisure time and social activity absolutely is. Online gaming where the only communication between players is jumping…

The irony is that the people I find to be most toxic in video games are the children. To the point that in a lot of "Looking for Group" Discord channels you see people saying "18+ only".

It's almost like people without fully developed brains don't have very healthy social interactions in a giant soup of similar kids who don't know how to have healthy social interactions and the 4chan-ness of it just encourages being as angry and toxic as possible.

It's actually probably the same problem drivers face. When driving, your brain kind of ignores that other normal humans drive the other cars, and therefore you are extremely judgemental of their actions, because you expect them to be perfect. This is why so many people road rage.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#123

Post by blitzar »

BryantD wrote: post #110
CivBase wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point we have to consider it the parent's/guardian's responsibility to restrict a child's access to any service that provides access to online, user-generated content without supervision. Despite all my problems with Epic, I agree with OP here. This should not be Epic's problem. This is a problem for parents/guardians and the ESRB/PEGI. The ESRB and PEGI rated the game for 13+ and 12+ respectively, which I'd…

I’d recommend reading the complaint. To my surprise, regardless of the ratings, Epic was explicitly marketing to 10+. Like there are written statements to that effect.

> Epic was explicitly marketing to 10+

Translated to english this means they were marketing to 6-14 year olds.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#124

Post by kevingadd »

Gareth321 wrote: post #4

I'm fine with Epic getting financially reprimanded for dark patterns and anti-consumer behaviour. I am not on board with this: > That lawsuit also accused the company of illegally enabling real-time voice and text chat communications for children and teens in the game by default. So voice chat must now be turned off by default for all children across America? How on earth is this supposed to be policed? Should everyo…

This is also an accessibility barrier for the blind. (To be fair, ADA regulations now require games to include text-to-speech and speech-to-text support for in-game chat to mitigate it.)

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#125

Post by kevingadd »

stardenburden wrote: post #116
sphars wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rocket League runs great with proton, and in my testing, it ran better than the native version when it was still available.

I am aware of that. But I didn't buy a proton version, I bought a Linux version.

So essentially, you were offered a remedy that allowed you to continue playing the game, you rejected the remedy, and now you're complaining? They're obligated to support the old version of the client forever, regardless of any obstacles to that?

If you bought it to play on a 32-bit Mac would they be obligated to port it to 64-bit? Would they be obligated to port an OpenGL-based client to Metal after Apple's deprecation?

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#126

Post by kevingadd »

GeekyBear wrote: post #120
lapcat wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a company that should be able to bypass app store restrictions? Every company should be able to bypass app store restrictions. I don't think the question is even framed correctly. Every iPhone owner should be able to bypass app store restrictions. Developers doing so is just a consequence of consumer choice.

Sorry, but I prefer the ability to do things like easily reverse fraudulent in app purchases, instantly cancel subscriptions without a hassle, and say no to location tracking without the app in question being allowed to drop functionality if I do so.

Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level, not at the store level. Even Windows has this.

Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront: https://www.epicgames.com/help/en-US/fortnite-c5719335176219...

So all that's left is reversing purchases. You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer for any fraudulent purchase, if you want Apple to act as that gatekeeper instead you should make purchases via Apple. Are you saying all vendors should be required to hand 30% of all their revenues to Apple so it is slightly easier for you to reverse a purchase, even though there are already well-tested universal channels for doing it?

I've had to reverse purchases before without dealing with Apple and it has always been a smooth process.

Basically your argument seems to boil down to "my convenience justifies a 30% tax on all app developers". Are you in favor of moves like Apple requiring a 30% tax on IRL event tickets sold via services like Facebook, even though Apple provides no services to the live event operator other than payment processing? Apple even prohibited Facebook from disclosing the tax's existence.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#127

Post by superkuh »

kevingadd wrote: post #125
stardenburden wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am aware of that. But I didn't buy a proton version, I bought a Linux version.

So essentially, you were offered a remedy that allowed you to continue playing the game, you rejected the remedy, and now you're complaining? They're obligated to support the old version of the client forever, regardless of any obstacles to that? If you bought it to play on a 32-bit Mac would they be obligated to port it to 64-bit? Would they be obligated to port an OpenGL-based client to Metal after Apple's deprecat…

Lets get back to reality here. Epic bought Rocket League. They said they wouldn't change anything during the purchase. 6 months later there is no more linux client.

You're telling me that because I can emulate the game it still exists. If I accept this premise than literally all games are linux games and the concept of platform goes out the window. It's absurd.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#128

Post by kbelder »

temprose wrote: post #68
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that parents are supposed to create accounts on Epic and Steam, not children. The parent selects the correct age during account creation.

What's stopping the kid from making a new account though? Knowing myself, I did similar things as a child especially since my parents were not very tech literate.

I've made fake accounts for my kids where I lied about their age, in order to bypass certain restrictions. That's how screwed up our legislation is in this area.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#129

Post by seattle_spring »

alasdair_ wrote: post #80
Gareth321 wrote: post #4

I'm fine with Epic getting financially reprimanded for dark patterns and anti-consumer behaviour. I am not on board with this: > That lawsuit also accused the company of illegally enabling real-time voice and text chat communications for children and teens in the game by default. So voice chat must now be turned off by default for all children across America? How on earth is this supposed to be policed? Should everyo…

It’s mostly down to who the game targets. If it’s clear that under 13 kids will be playing, then COPA rules apply. So if you are making a Lego game, you’ll need to comply, but if you are making “Murder Sex Drugs III” then you won’t.

> Murder Sex Drugs III

I'd preorder that game in a heartbeat.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#130

Post by kevingadd »

superkuh wrote: post #127
kevingadd wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So essentially, you were offered a remedy that allowed you to continue playing the game, you rejected the remedy, and now you're complaining? They're obligated to support the old version of the client forever, regardless of any obstacles to that? If you bought it to play on a 32-bit Mac would they be obligated to port it to 64-bit? Would they be obligated to port an OpenGL-based client to Metal after Apple's deprecat…

Lets get back to reality here. Epic bought Rocket League. They said they wouldn't change anything during the purchase. 6 months later there is no more linux client. You're telling me that because I can emulate the game it still exists. If I accept this premise than literally all games are linux games and the concept of platform goes out the window. It's absurd.

Proton is a compatibility layer (just like WINE), not an emulator, unless you're planning to play on ARM64. It's just like using VKD3D or MoltenGL instead of using a native graphics API, plenty of games do that.

They're letting you play the game you paid for. I can understand being unhappy about the loss of a Linux client, but by all reports the Proton version runs better, so what's the actual problem other than your ideology? Epic is a corporation, not a religion.

Post reply on HN