Yep, I already own it on gog though (free copy from a giveaway a little more than a year ago). You can easily put in a 100 hours of gameplay on your first playthrough if not a couple hundred more.
wow @tunsel11 incredible find! if it turns out as good as it looks this is really crazy. really love the three viewpoints.
It does require quite a beast, the graphics are phenomenal. But pro-tip @Geers motion blur has got to be the most gpu-hungry thing in witcher and it's on by default. Turn it off and you'll see serious improvement in performance ( except if you're on a cruddy laptop)
This has been around for a while now so everyone's probably heard of it, but just in case, this game looks really cool.
Shady as fluck. https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...ivisions_dmca_claim_on_orion_is_legit_orions/ And then they posted THIS: "We don't have a case but send money pls". Meltdown time! https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...ion_developer_threatens_legal_action_against/
They don't have a case but Activision is damaging their income which is what they're asking for help to recover from. They could very well have a case against Activision, suing them for damages, and I'm surprised people are against them. They might have been a **** dev before, but they don't deserve the DMCA. It's just like fair use takedowns on Youtube. These guys have created everything themselves- and even if some weapons are similar it doesn't really matter. TLDR: They aren't going for the case, even though they have every right. Instead they're just asking people to help with damages rather than suing Activision (even though activision should be sued for false takedown/damages.)
This doesn't matter. There are no actual stolen models afaik- Just similar designs. Edit: In fact I'd say they look better in Orion, lmao. Edit2: Next you're going to say it's okay to sue people selling cosplay or something of a specific character. Which while is totally a copy of a character, they built it themselves.
So if I made an identical replica of a M1 Garand in my game the owner of the rights to the M1 Garand has a right to sue me? Yeah right. Any shooter game dev would be fucked if that were the case.
M1 Garand Cod 5 M1 Garand Wow notice how similar it is? Only a few small changes and they claim it for their game! Ridiculous.
Except that's a real gun that exists. And devs didn't copy the gun to make a gun. They made a 3D model of the gun. And evidently there is some agreement between the entertainment industry and the arms industry or its covered by fair use. That kind of similarity doesn't happen by accident. Or even just unconscious influence. It's EXACTLY the same.
Yes but surely it too falls under fair use in the same way copying a weapon in real life, with said intention, falls under fair use. If you give this the cut as being infringing you give companies so much power over things certainly less infringing. What if I make a weapon so generic and call it mine, and another company happens to make a weapon similar with no connection. Calling this infringing would give me the power to argue this weapon as infringing. Where does something become illegal and when not? It'd be totally open! Easter eggs and etc could even be considered infringing. If you don't let this pass we might open a whole can of worms. Edit: And another thing- you say it'd be different if a game copied a gun to make their own weapon? Well in CS 1.6 they'd used real world weapons but renamed them. Ak-47 to Cv-47 for example. And I know a few other games that do this, Dirty Bomb being and example. Is that infringing? They're copying a weapon and then renaming it- claiming it as their "new" weapon.
Pony, CS1.6 and Dirty Bomb don't manufacture guns. They didn't copy a gun. They took a gun and 3D-modelled it. And considering that easter eggs have existed for pretty much as long as games have, and that "talking" about a thing isn't the same as literally copy/pasting, I think they're pretty safe. Maybe I should clarify: They're being accused of stealing assets. Not just making a thing that looks like Activision's thing. And they have dodgy flucking history: http://www.gatheryourparty.com/2012/05/04/orion-employee-beatdown/ And remember when they re-uploaded there game to Steam with basically no changes? Have you even bothered to look at that imgur gallery? It's NOT that the guns are similar. THEY ARE COMPLETELY IDENTICAL. EVEN THE LITTLE GROOVES AND BOLTS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. If Activision didn't have a case, why the fluck would they bother with some random two-bit shooter that nobody gives a flying fluck about? Orion is like the shitty B-movie of shooters. Activision isn't going to bother with it unless there is a legitimate case of intellectual theft. And there undoubtedly is.
I believe them. given the typos all over these texts there's a certain authenticity. plus he's not lying, he literally is a tiny company who's in a situation where his job/passion is more of a money sinkhole than a profit, since he needs the kind of pull and userbase activition has before he can be legitimate in asking for anything more than 50c for his game, which is a sad reflection of the game industry today. you have to front up money you don't have to cleave yourself a slice of the business pie, which the guys around the table don't wanna share. On the other hand the comparisons between the guns quite clearly show stolen 3D assets (the textures got lost along the way), but he justified this with press conf bedazzle you slap together just before the event that isn't intended to be in the game, and that players won't get their hands on. If this is a common practice in the business, however irritating, I understand it. why? because there's no intention to sell, end-result, Activision's property. I don't think there's sufficient prescription or ill will from the devs of Orion to warrant it's termination, ethically speaking of course. Legally, Activision can probably throw sufficient amounts of wads of cash at it to get their way, and I really don't like that idea.
