Perhaps a more important question. Are you now hungry?
Comment has been collapsed.
No, but only because I've literally just finished eating. Your poll is downright evil!
Comment has been collapsed.
I just ate Potatoes au gratin tonight, so I'd say Destiny is doing something right now for sure.
Comment has been collapsed.
I need to make more potato based dishes, it's a humble ingredient but can be so good even just by cooking it well with salt, or elevating it through many means!
Comment has been collapsed.
Completely agree. It's hard to go wrong with potatoes.
Comment has been collapsed.
No no no...
There is only one "t" in pomme frite!
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think the game linked in the poll is made by Valve. 😆
While I think that they probably shouldn't have made a whole article since the game asks you not to... I mean, yeah, there are literally images and videos all over the Internet. I however do see people that have legal agreements/partnerships with Valve that won't even name that "unannounced upcoming Valve game" even though everyone knows now. :shrug:
(I didn't know The Verge covered and had a controversy until your thread, but that's probably because I don't really read/watch news)
Comment has been collapsed.
It's definitely being made by Valve. Oh. NVM. I see what happened there lol.
Not having been aware of the controversy is no great loss, honestly.
I can also see how news outlets would be scared to piss off Valve. Kinda like they used to be scared of EA and Ubi and such.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd say real journalism is always justified, when it shows something real that others don't want you to see.
In this particular case, I don't know much about Deadlock, but as you say, NDA is non binding (because a clause like this can't be enforced without a paying retribution (and accessing the game earlier is NOT a paying retribution)
So not really knowing the outrage, I would give points for the Verge.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is my own perspective as well.
Plus, it's not exactly a secret when anybody can be invited to the playtest by anybody already in the playtest. It's an option in the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't even get what you are asking. Can you explain it to me like you would explain it to your five year old baby girl, please?
Poll's yummy though, tough choice!
Comment has been collapsed.
Did The Verge actually do anything wrong by doing some journalism and reporting on Deadlock and simply not acknowledging or accepting the non-binding NDA pop up when entering the game? Does the fact that literally anybody with a Steam account can playtest this 'super secret' game due to string invites factor into your opinion?
I think that qualifies as something a five-year-old might understand. YMMV though. Kinda depends on the specific five-year-old.
So far, Potatoes au Gratin are in the lead, which is something of a shocker to me personally lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know the game nor the story, but I'm guessing when launching the game there is a message "please uwu don't talk about the game. kthxbye" and the verge still wrote about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think asking if the controversy is valid or not is confusing. Instead the question should be on what your stand on the controversy is.
Or maybe it's because I haven't taken a good look at the controversy. Who is creating the controversy? Is it the Verge creating the controversy over being called out for the leaks or is it from the people that think the Verge shouldn't have leaked that info?
Comment has been collapsed.
As I can see from the description, the new Deadlock game has invite going around ALL the places (I got an invite as well)
There is a non-binding NDA (non-disclosure agreement) which is the legal equivalent of making puppy eyes and asking the players not to talk about what they see and experience in the game.
The Verge said that's stupid, hold my beer, and got some info out (I guess?)
I don't know where is the controversy tbh, journalists doing journalism, the game is super not secret, and there is no legal problem with writing about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Aaah, thank you. That was five year old proof. Me to myself: "WTF is a non-bining NDA?" thank you for explaining that and all the rest as well, which was totally unclear to someone not not into the topic at all.
On topic: I couldn't care less...
Comment has been collapsed.
Non-binding NDA?
There wasn't any NDA at all.
Just Valve asking people to ...
Basically PR-speak for "please talk about our game, but keep it vague so we still get some advertising and people remember that we actually may make a game or two every few years
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't really feel sorry for The Verge, I mean, they are the same entitled people that made that horrendous PC build a couple years ago and then pretended they were completely right and people just didn't know how to build PC's (and i sincerely hope nobody followed that video because my god).
Now, Valve has the right to do whatever they want at the end of the day - they haven't released this game nor announced it, even though everyone knows about it and it's not hard to find more stuff about the game if you care enough to go look for it. Why did those guys felt the need they have to report on it first with such a detailed explanation, without even waiting for a statement or a trailer or anything really about the developers behind it? If you open up a game and the game says "please don't take screenshots or record anything we are still in development", why do they have to be different?
It's not really breaching NDA but it was avoidable, simply as that
Comment has been collapsed.
That PC build was legendary lol. I don't think that's really a criterion for determining things about their work years later, but it's definitely a classic.
Comment has been collapsed.
I expect Valve not to expect any confidentiality.
Still I fully support taking any and all opportunities to burn, attack and ridicule any gaming journalist or publication.
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted "yes", cause I think it's a scumbag move. NDAs like these have been a gentlemen's agreement within the gaming industry since before the first coming of christ. But even if you disagree, The Verge seems to know they're in the wrong based on this dumbass 'defense':
"wElL AcKShuAllY i hIT tHE eScaPe kEy sO iT DoeSnT CoUnT" 🤪😭
Like, if it's not binding, just use that argument instead if you're not gonna care about agreements 🤦
This ended up being a long ass comment for something I don't really care much about anyway🤷♂️
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with you. Also think they did more damage to their own failing website than they did to Valve, as from now on, any team that actually wants to keep something on the down side will never share access with these people/website and that's it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Same. I would have a lot to say on this, but it was really the author's liability by pretending that freedom of the press is an excuse. He's a total prick. This is the kind of thing that Walter Cronkite wouldn't appreciate. It undermines the credibility of the publication and the author. Laughing it off is quite foolish. I mean, even Kotaku caught the trifecta of blacklists; people will have a long memory of these things.
Like, I would have opinions about Carl Kenner and his ridiculousness, for example, but I wouldn't stoop to the excuse of saying "oh, I just bypassed it, so it shouldn't even matter". That's like trying to use Napster back in the old days just so you don't have to pay for the license. You don't have room for these excuses these days.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's actually not true. Freedom of press is a valid reason for any investigative reporting. Were it not for actual journalism, a lot of secret things would never come to light, despite the objections and wishes of the people doing the things that got reported. Actual journalism is not bound by gentleman's agreements or NDAs or anything else like that. It is bound only by reporting real information that comes across their desk and that they investigate, regardless of opinions on that reporting.
The real question is whether game's journalism is a actual journalism. The Verge's response suggests that they don't consider themselves to be actual journalists. If they did, they wouldn't make excuses for reporting on something that Valve wanted to keep secret. They'd be unapologetic about engaging in journalism and wouldn't make excuses.
Comment has been collapsed.
Violating a legal agreement is not really a defense for freedom of the press. That applies to everyone. Especially when you're bound to confidentiality, there are things you can't say. I say this also as someone who also used to work for the US government - specifically the military. If there is something I know of, or is material bound to confidentiality that others know about, it would be bad OPSEC if they let myself or anyone else blab about it. It would be unauthorized. A civilian agreement is not that different, especially regarding NDAs. Heck, there's a famous meme where every now and then there's someone on the War Thunder forums leaking classified materials. Moderators don't play.
Given the nature of this was permission-based in its basic form, he should have gotten the green light BEFORE publishing the piece. It's really that simple. He should have respected Valve's wishes or at least ask if he wanted to proceed. Instead, he even went the extra mile not only to divulge that he bypassed it, he later also openly tried to deny there was an agreement at all, gaslighting the public when it was in his own article.
The "gentleman's agreement" Valve used is still materially a legitimate agreement. You have something in writing, that in itself is crucial when the agreement is accepted. Because it is in writing, if that was actually accepted, that is actually effectively binding. Trust me, if you spoke to a lawyer about it, they'll explain it to you. Even a simple email correspondence can be binding. Just ask the guy who screwed himself over when he replied with an emoji (yeah,t hat happened, look it up). That the author attempted to bypass the banner doesn't mean he was given the right to that level of access or even given permission in the first place just because it didn't have a layer of protection for that situation - especially when while the boilerplate message itself specifically states to keep it a secret. He jumped the fence, trespassed, and gone as far as to deliberately break the rules when he shouldn't have had to do all that.
This is basically contracts 101. They got it in writing, there has to be some sort of response and interpretation for the lack thereof. Valve had to address that issue when they discovered the breach.
It's just like Kotaku, which leaks game info and that is what got themselves blacklisted. The difference is that in this case, the author openly is leaking the contents of the game while ignoring the terms altogether. Two huge no-nos.
It really doesn't matter if they don't call themselves game journalists, or even plain journalists. Materially they were doing journalism, and the author's subject was the game. As far as anyone was concerned, The Verve was the publisher of the article, so it was journalism. It's irrelevant whether they were good at it or not. They've jeopardized their credibility and legitimacy to publish that article in the first place.
Comment has been collapsed.
The 'agreement' was only implied and could be circumvented by literally anybody. Actual agreements are not so vague, lol. And actual agreements also requires both parties to be signatories. Something that definitely did not happen.
And as mentioned, actual reporting often happens against the wishes of the people or things being reported on. In fact, most investigative journalism reveals things that people wish to keep hidden. That's why the investigation part occurs. And taking it a step further, that is also why journalists have had to do things like take hidden cameras into places that don't allow cameras, why they take eyewitness accounts from sources that are legally bound to not discuss those things and also why journalists can't be forced to 'reveal their sources'. At least here in the States where Valve is also located.
Their credibility only becomes diminished for their making excuses rather than simply stating that they were investigating and reporting on this new secret game (that literally everybody had access to due to string invites). Their only failure was in making excuses at all. They really didn't need to.
I don't blame you for being confused though. We live in a world where opinion shows and opinion pieces are treated like journalism by the masses.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am NOT in the least bit confused about anything. I'm literally explaining it to you.
Yes, for an agreement to be effective (that is, executed), you need all the required signatories. In some cases however, an agreement could already be executed as soon as the minimum of one party agrees to it, FYI. Ergo, it wouldn't have to be countersigned. Yet, I also wouldn't think this would be the burden on Valve's part, which tells me that it would be executed automatically. Again, as I stated, whether the author agreed to the terms or not has no bearing on whether the agreement can be executed itself. The nature of the agreement is likely already in effect then and there with or without his consent. The consent is only required for his use. That is, it would've granted him license to use it as long as he sticks to the terms. That is it. No confusion there.
On one hand, the fact he acted as if he did, while violating the rules, he breached the contract. On the other, if you apply some legal theory instead and pretend that he himself is not a party to the agreement if we assume he technically did not consent or revoked it, but had breached the terms anyway, I would say that is leaning towards tortious interference territory because he's intending to breach a contract which Valve is a party even if he himself is not. By those actions, I would not be surprised Valve may have grounds to sue him. I'm sure there's more ammo they could use besides that, but he's lucky Valve was more considerate. This doesn't mean he is off the hook. He technically violated the agreement one way or another, and should not have been attempting to violate the agreement, even if expressing that he revoked consent. His consent is irrelevant at that point because he injured another party. This should never be condoned.
Beyond that, I don't care about arguing the credibility of the publication. They undermined themselves and their reporting, and no amount of the power of the press could change the ethical and legal violations they committed. The ban is a lesser punishment to The Verge's liability here, and they do deserve the consequences. Their "investigation" means nothing when they did so without respecting anything of it. Actually, it would also be a farce to even defend/argue for them if they themselves don't take themselves seriously as a journalism publication. They've demonstrated they did not respect the subject matter they published, why should anyone think they were innocuous in all this?
Comment has been collapsed.
You use terms such as "likely" because you aren't even confident in the stance you're taking. Which is understandable. I have no confidence in your position either. And so we agree.
And while I already said they clearly don't consider themselves to be journalists, if they did, all of their actions would be justified in the name of journalism. That's just how it is whether you like it or not. It's only when they started making excuses that they left journalism behind. Such is life lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's nothing to do with my "confidence". I'm telling you that when it's likely is something, being it's nothing else that would not make it so. There are numerous examples I've seen played out in similar situations. This is my nice way of saying "There is no chance in hell is it what you think. You're plainly wrong about this." This is not an agreement with you. I've learned a lot from lawyers for a number of years. I'm way more aware of things more than you exhibit here.
Once again, it is totally irrelevant whether they consider themselves journalists or not. This is meaningless! The issue is that they have the guy who wrote the article prodly telling us he intentionally breached the terms. Whether you call it an actual agreement or not, he screwed Valve over in more ways than one. He was in the wrong, period.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm obviously not wrong, but I appreciate the effort you are putting towards it.
I'd also say they didn't screw Valve at all. Valve literally lost nothing, and there were and still are unlimited string invites. Literally everybody on Steam could and can playtest it if they want to. Valve obviously realized how silly and pointless the attempt at secrecy was and went ahead and just opened up the product page since it was already the worst kept secret in gaming, Verge article or no Verge article.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are wrong though.
The fact there are "invites" is immaterial to the agreement itself. That is a whole different thing. It was an NDA. That's the point. The "invite", the "access", the "unlimited" whatever is NOT material to the problem at all. It was all about the treatment of the NDA. The NDA said "do not snitch to the public about this game". That's the agreement. Ubisoft does the same thing in a bunch of the Beta programs I've been in myself. They even go the extra step of adding a layer of security to ID the actual account who leaked what they were disallowed to leak. It absolutely does not matter whether they were there by invite, or they applied to it. The point is the NDA is the agreement that is ingrained in the session upon using the game. When it is under the protection of the NDA, confidentiality is a priority, not an afterthought. If he wasn't agreeing to the rules, he's not supposed to be using it and then breaching the rules. That is how you get in a very expensive civil suit.
It wasn't really "public" due to the NDA itself. He didn't follow the rules whether he agreed to it or not. He ignored those rules and snitched anyway. That's the whole point of the issue. The fact he effectively rescinded agreement by bypassing the process does not hold weight at this point whatsoever, no matter what you "think" it entails, because on top of that is his willingness to break the terms of the contract int he end is what gets him the boot. There is no point in you furthering your argument to me by being condescending. You literally have no argument here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, there was no NDA. There was simply a request. Non-binding as it were. No need to be upset. It happens. I do appreciate the attempt at uncertified expertise though.
Comment has been collapsed.
UPSET?
When you're comically wrong about all of this, with the fact the screen itself is the NDA that Valve is communicating, you yourself have lost credibility as much as the author who tried to pull the same lie on social media.
Again, take the L and stop arguing. It was an NDA, he purposely bypassed it. No one does that and tries to pretend it wasn't one in the first place. Your'e full of crap.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do truly value the "I've been around lawyers, and thus I'm a lawyer" approach to debate. I've learned a lot from lawyers for a number of years. Fortunately, there have been more than a couple enjoyable quotes from you. The OPSEC one was fun as well.
But seriously, don't be upset. It's not my fault you've taken an untenable position. Actin' all mad and stuff doesn't suit someone with your impressive self-endorsements.
Comment has been collapsed.
tbh it's a site I haven't heard about since ages, writing about a game about I don't care about. If games can play around the laws by saying that CEO tweets and boasting about features doesn't count as advertisement because it's not official, then I don't give a rat's ass about somebody writing a basically publicly available game because idk, reasons.
Comment has been collapsed.
Person deserved to get banned. You can say "he didn't agree to it" and that probably might hold up in the court of law but getting banned is just at Valve's discretion. Everyone that started up the game knows Valve's intention, whether or not you signed an NDA or agreed to the statement. Going against their intention risks you from getting banned.
Comment has been collapsed.
Valve banning him isn't really controversial. It's free access and they are free to do so if they want. It might be seen as petulant, but it is certainly not the controversy.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's two peas of the same pod (or whatever the phrase is). If this is just in regards to what Verge did, then it's still wrong since they clearly went against Valve's intention, regardless of how easy it is to get into the beta. Unless I'm just slightly confused on what the controversy is, is there something deeper I'm missing?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's more about the reaction to The Verge's reporting by various other sites and publications. Valve's reaction was silent and doesn't really seem to be coming under any scrutiny by anybody that I've seen. Although IMO, given the complete lack of secrecy regarding the game as a result of the unlimited player invites, it does seem odd that Valve would care.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do not know if the Verge's guy should get a death sentence, or should get a Pulitzer.... well, prooooobably something in between. :D
But I will say this: I am grateful he wrote about the game. I say this because I got this random invite to try "Deadlock", and I had no idea what it was... as far as I knew, it could have been some new sort of virus or scam, there is no page for it, no hint what it was about.
So, reading the Verge's article I learned that (i) it was not a scam; and more importantly (ii) it was a game I probably did not want to try right now, so I did not waste my time downloading, installing or trying it.
Cheers!
Comment has been collapsed.
Dude, those are some excellent potato recipes. Now I'm hungry for taters.
Comment has been collapsed.
To me it just seems likely that Verge might not get invited to other game previews because they did this.
But when I googled the game, I found it was a 6v6 game. Presumably that was correct, so I don't see that it might have been the only source of info, as suggested.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that is a safe assumption regarding their receiving future invites.
And I agree that its not the only source of info. I haven't shared my thoughts after playing it, but I do think more people are going to be willing to do so. Especially if they don't like the game and don't care if they receive a game ban.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is very much a Twitter argument, no person that isn't chronically online cares etiher way.
Comment has been collapsed.
You wanted to make me hungry but failed.
Now the counter attack^^
Pic 1 and 2 = Lamb meat from new zealand, potatos, carrots, onion, leak, garlic, noodles and a brown sauce.
Pic 3 = Pork meat, carrots and small potatoes with a sweet mustard + honey marinate
Pic 4 and 5 = Chicken with potatoes, carots and paprika
Pic 6 and 7 = Potato salad and Schäufele (smoked pig shoulder, a special thing from my region and only known in 100 - 150km range). Both can be eaten warm and cold and taste great in both ways.
One of my favorites. I would kill for this food!
And my family, friends, (ex) gfs etc. like my potato salad much more as the one from my mother. She hate it :-D
Pic 8 = Funny and not from me :D
Comment has been collapsed.
6/7 would be something I'd bring with me for lunch while hiking in addition to eating at home, but I think I would be super happy with all four dishes. All around deliciousness.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you want to claim that Schäufele is only known in your region you may rather call it Baden Schäufele ;)
And indeed my first thought was... what? you call this Schäufele!... because for me Schäufele = Franconien Schäufele ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I prefer it normaly with a bone, it taste better, and i freeze the cooking water and use it then for soups, and bigger but it gets harder and harder to get them with the bone because people don't like to pay the high price for the weight of the not eatable part.
Is "Franconien Schäufele" something else or did you only know Schäufele from your region ?
All my bavarian and frankonian friends not known Schäufele, only in the direction of Mannheim, Stuttgart and Frankfurt a. M. was it known.
So i am a bit confused right now.
Alles meins, ich teile nicht und ich gebs nicht her! :-D
Comment has been collapsed.
The Franconien Schäufele is with the bone and the (i do not know the word in english) "schwarte" on top and also not smoked meat.
And in Franconien Schäufele is a thing, you friends not knowing it, most likely only means they never go to a reginal/traditional restaurant.
If you google schäufele the top pictures are even franconian schäufele.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's silly controversy. And I think this is exactly what The Verge wanted.
But while making this article The Verge forgot something very important: Steam was made by Valve.
So they did accept terms (Steam SSA) when they made Steam account.
https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/
Which contains following:
B. Beta Software License
Valve may from time to time make software accessible to you via Steam prior to the general commercial release of such software ("Beta Software"). You are not required to use Beta Software, but if Valve offers it, you may elect to use it under the following terms. Beta Software will be deemed to consist of Content and Services, and each item of Beta Software provided will be deemed a Subscription for such Beta Software, with the following provisions specific to Beta Software:
Your right to use the Beta Software may be limited in time, and may be subject to additional Subscription Terms;
Valve or any Valve affiliate may request or require that you provide suggestions, feedback, or data regarding your use of the Beta Software, which will be deemed User Generated Content under Section 6 (User Generated Content) below; and
In addition to the waivers and limitations of liability for all Software under Section 7 (Disclaimers; Limitations on Liability; No Guarantees; Limited Warranty & Agreement) below as applicable, you specifically acknowledge that Beta Software is only released for testing and improvement purposes, in particular to provide Valve with feedback on the quality and usability of the Beta Software, and therefore contains errors and is not final. If you decide to install and/or use Beta Software, you shall only use it in compliance with its purposes, i.e. for testing and improvement purposes, in compliance with system requirements specifically intended for each Beta Software and in any case not on a system or for purposes where the malfunction of the Beta Software can cause any kind of damage. In particular, maintain full backups of any system that you choose to install Beta Software on.
so there's that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Controversy continues with slander threats to SidAlpha:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veDYO7X1HfE
Comment has been collapsed.
It doesn't seem like the dude made any actual threats. He said it was slander and a conversation ensued. Beyond that, it looks like both of them were making assumptions about each other and just running with it.
Personally, I've found both Sid and Tom periodically take unreasonable positions under false pretense in the past. And then die on those hills. In contrast, they've both also done excellent reporting in the past as well. Mixed bag.
Comment has been collapsed.
Did The Verge actually do anything wrong by doing some journalism and reporting on Deadlock and simply not acknowledging or accepting the non-binding NDA pop up when entering the game? Does the fact that literally anybody with a Steam account can playtest this 'super secret' game due to string invites factor into your opinion? Do you even care one way or the other?
Comment has been collapsed.