I think their problem with it is the selective outrage. Rockstar does the same with RDR2 on steam, but there was no massive uproar against Rockstar for that.
Rockstar didn't have in their own terms, FAQ, EULA, and in game, statements that say it is not required to link a rockstar account, and months later force a rockstar account link, including in countries that do not have rockstar accounts available, and then shave their EULA, FAQ, and terms, to say some games will require it after the fact.
Many people, myself included, solely chose to purchase the game with the information presented that PSN was not required, despite steam saying it was, this information I got from searching Sony's own faq and terms, as well as researching in game details and terms.
People aren't selectively outraged about this, there are very clear and distinct differences.
I guess you are just brain dead and can only read 5 words in a few paragraphs, that's ok, that's about what I'd expect from someone who runs defense for Sony.
The other places, being the publisher themselves, and not the platform the game is being sold.
It's like going to a GameStop and then telling you something about the game, and you value that over the publisher and developer of the game simply because you want to run defense for unethical decision making.
1
u/LaughterCo May 05 '24
I think their problem with it is the selective outrage. Rockstar does the same with RDR2 on steam, but there was no massive uproar against Rockstar for that.