Backbreaker News Post

Backbreaker Preview (Xbox 360 Magazine)

03:24 PM - February 24, 2010 by granddogg

One of the Backbreaker forum members, managed to scan the Xbox 360 Magazine preview of the game.

Quote:


	"Just thought I'd point out to all those UK BB fans, there's a new 4 page preview hitting the stands today. There are some juicy quotes in the there!"

Game: BackbreakerReader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 51 - View All

Backbreaker Videos

Member Comments

# 41 adamgod8 @ 02/27/10 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wEEman33


	So did anyone else read the part on page 3 were it says "Full FIFA-style, 11-versus-11 online play"? Does that mean we are finally getting some full-team online action ala FIFA, NHL and NBA Live? That would be huge if true. Edit: on page 4, it also says the game supports 1 -22 players! This could be happening!

I guess I'll be the bearer of bad news....that was a mistake by the magazine, it is actually 2v2 online.

# 42 TheWatcher @ 02/27/10 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronnieb


	oh men you just scare the hell out of me is there a video gamer judge in the supreme court we can rely on ? just in case ....

I doubt it, but at the very least I hope whoever presides over this will have been able to examine this small-appearing but MASSIVELY huge detail. It can easily get lost in the shuffle of the overall claim and that's where our concern would be if this goes any further.

We just keep getting into one mess after another and you hate to think about this so close to the release of an unlicensed football game with so much promise, but it is something that has to be talked about because the possibilities are all very real.

I don't want to take a shot at one company and single one out, but clearly there has been a lot of irresponsibility and poor judgement, and it just seems like 2004 is where we can pinpoint where it all went wrong, and the same names keep popping up as being involved. The people involved just don't seem to want to do the right things and do anything responsibly, and the gamers aren't speaking up enough and so far we haven't gotten organized, but that's really what needs to happen.

We're at the point now where one court case can either save our market or cause its extinction altogether over the course of this decade. I never thought such a thing could ever happen. It's really a nightmare. You just know that whoever is in the market now without a license trying to make an unlicensed sports game is going to leave and move on to other projects once they find out editing is dead if editing is ever eliminated. Not being able to edit was acceptable a few generations ago, but today that's a product destroyer.

# 43 CharleyDanger @ 02/27/10 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheWatcher


	I doubt it, but at the very least I hope whoever presides over this will have been able to examine this small-appearing but MASSIVELY huge detail. It can easily get lost in the shuffle of the overall claim and that's where our concern would be if this goes any further. We just keep getting into one mess after another and you hate to think about this so close to the release of an unlicensed football game with so much promise, but it is something that has to be talked about because the possibilities are all very real. I don't want to take a shot at one company and single one out, but clearly there has been a lot of irresponsibility and poor judgement, and it just seems like 2004 is where we can pinpoint where it all went wrong, and the same names keep popping up as being involved. The people involved just don't seem to want to do the right things and do anything responsibly, and the gamers aren't speaking up enough and so far we haven't gotten organized, but that's really what needs to happen. We're at the point now where one court case can either save our market or cause its extinction altogether over the course of this decade. I never thought such a thing could ever happen. It's really a nightmare. You just know that whoever is in the market now without a license trying to make an unlicensed sports game is going to leave and move on to other projects once they find out editing is dead if editing is ever eliminated. Not being able to edit was acceptable a few generations ago, but today that's a product destroyer.

Very good post, many solid points. Yet the lawsuit states

"EA Sports "intentionally circumvents the prohibitions on utilizing student-athletes' names by allowing gamers to upload entire rosters, which include players' names and other information, directly into the game in a matter of seconds."

This speaks to the shared content aspect of the game. I think creation and editing in games will be just fine imo. The DMCA even says if companies are at least trying to prevent infringement then the companies are in the clear. If the companies just remove content sharing as a in game tool then I think they will avoid liability
99% of the time.

# 44 jyoung @ 02/27/10 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adamgod8


	I guess I'll be the bearer of bad news....that was a mistake by the magazine, it is actually 2v2 online.

Bummer.

I don't understand how the magazine can make this mistake when the preview makes it looks like they were in direct contact with the developers.

The actual writing for this piece made me cringe a bit, too.

# 45 adamgod8 @ 02/27/10 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wEEman33


	Bummer. I don't understand how the magazine can make this mistake when the preview makes it looks like they were in direct contact with the developers. The actual writing for this piece made me cringe a bit, too.

The two theories at this point are that either:

1) The writer misunderstood when the devs said it would be "11v11 football" -as in it will be actual football and not some arcade game.

-OR-

2) This information wasn't suppose to be announced until the embargo lifts and the magazine wasn't suppose to publish it yet, which is why the devs denied it to be true.

# 46 elgreazy1 @ 02/27/10 05:48 PM

The writer should be canned. Not only did he completely botch a lot of the information, but his writing was packed with too much fluff. He was either trying to be clever or he was attempting to beat the reader over the head with his writing prowess; regardless of which he failed miserably.

# 47 jyoung @ 02/27/10 06:18 PM

Those who remember the PC game Freedom Force will recall that one of the comic book companies tried to sue EA because the game allowed users to recreate likenesses of Wolverine, Captain America, etc.

But that lawsuit was thrown out by the courts on the grounds that you can't legislate user-created content.

Backbreaker has nothing to worry about when it comes to users recreating existing NFL/NCAA teams.

# 48 CharleyDanger @ 02/27/10 06:35 PM

Like I said the DMCA says that companies have a legal responsibility to police illegal UGC, and if they do not they can be held liable.

http://www.lawofthelevel.com/2009/07...bility-claims/

Its your 1st amendment right to create what you want, but it is law that companies must remove the content if it is infringing.

Another thing is that all the other examples like fantasy baseball and comic book characters do not compare to the amount of infringement that there would be in an recreation of the NFL in BB. We are talking over 700 players and 32 teams that MILLIONS would end up using.

The below is a quote from the above link. It was written by a lawyer specializing in interactive entertainment law

"With increased flexibility in content creation and UGC comes increased risk of copyright infringement. Game designers must carefully consider the balance between gameplay and self-protection"

# 49 t11 @ 02/27/10 07:08 PM

Look at the post above yours CD.

# 50 CharleyDanger @ 02/27/10 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t11


	Look at the post above yours CD.

AHHHHHHHH, go back to the BB forum T LOL

If you read my post you would of seen that I addressed the comic book case.

And what really makes the NFL/NatMo thing so different is that in the Keller/EA case the judge did not thrown out the case. That means the judge looked at all legal precedents and refused to throw the lawsuit out.

If it has truly been a legal precedent that companies are not responsible for its UGC, then the EA judge would of thrown the UGC part of Kellers case out months ago.

# 51 CharleyDanger @ 02/27/10 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wEEman33


	Those who remember the PC game Freedom Force will recall that one of the comic book companies tried to sue EA because the game allowed users to recreate likenesses of Wolverine, Captain America, etc. But that lawsuit was thrown out by the courts on the grounds that you can't legislate user-created content. Backbreaker has nothing to worry about when it comes to users recreating existing NFL/NCAA teams.

Do you have a link to something about the EA V comic book company? I cant find anything about it.

# 52 t11 @ 02/27/10 09:11 PM

Well, it proves you are right. lol. The company was forced to legal action. BUT the court threw out the case under the grounds that you can't legislate UGC.

# 53 t11 @ 02/27/10 09:25 PM

BUT, lets not turn this into another content sharing thread lol.

This preview is promising but I can't wait to here more next week!

# 54 ronnieb @ 02/27/10 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CharleyDanger


	Very good post, many solid points. Yet the lawsuit states "EA Sports "intentionally circumvents the prohibitions on utilizing student-athletes' names by allowing gamers to upload entire rosters, which include players' names and other information, directly into the game in a matter of seconds." This speaks to the shared content aspect of the game. I think creation and editing in games will be just fine imo. The DMCA even says if companies are at least trying to prevent infringement then the companies are in the clear. If the companies just remove content sharing as a in game tool then I think they will avoid liability 99% of the time.

i need some help to undersatnd cause i m french (yes french and a football fan..) my english is ok but the discussions is becoming very technical from alegal stand point, if i sum what you mean :
1/ you can edit whatever you want (names, teams, stadium
field, commercials stands etc...)...
2...if and only if you can t share it with a system like 2K share for example..am i right ?
thanks for clarification but i think the stakes are huge for the future of sport gaming

# 55 t11 @ 02/27/10 09:46 PM

Thats what he is saying. If you create the NFL on your game, there is nothing the NFL can do about it. But if there is a download on a service provided by Natural Motion, the NFL can shut it down.

However, when you refer to 2k, I'm assuming you mean 2k5. Backbreaker would not be liable for people uploading there saves to a site and then letting others download.

So really, you will be able to get the NFL into Backbreaker no matter what. Its just the convience of it that we are arguing about.

# 56 CharleyDanger @ 02/27/10 09:47 PM

Ok I found out about the Marvel law suit. The lawsuit was filed against the publisher of City of Heros, NCsoft, and the developer Cryptic Studios.

The case was not thrown out entirely, only certain key elements. There was some type of settlement that has not been disclosed.

It turns out that much of the infringed content was created by Marvel, meaning that Marvel created characters in City of Heros to help their lawsuit. Also that that the infringing content was small enough to be considered under the protection of the DMCA.

Source: http://www.megagames.com/news/marvel...-heroes-part-1

Like I have said before, the major difference with BB will be the insane amount of infringing content, it will be unprecedented honestly. 700 players, 32 teams, and here is the key... MILLIONS sharing it. The NFL will sh!t its self LOL

I would like to quote the judge from the above case

"Only ...where a computer system operator is aware of specific infringing material on the computer system, and fails to remove it, the system operator contributes to infringement, the Court stated"

This proves my position. If NatMo did nothing while millions of its user were using an illegal recreation of the NFL, then NatMo would be held liable.

# 57 t11 @ 02/27/10 10:11 PM

WOO! You finally got a case that was closed to support your position! ARGUMENT OVER!

Finally

# 58 SouthernBrick @ 02/27/10 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t11


	BUT, lets not turn this into another content sharing thread lol. This preview is promising but I can't wait to here more next week!

Could you estimate roughly what day some more info could drop?

Is it going to be on monday or tuesday or are we going to have to wait forever(exaggeration) until friday or something?

# 59 t11 @ 02/27/10 11:02 PM

Well, the latest we should have to wait according to my mathematical model would be friday. But Rob hinted the embargo lifts first week of March. Which is this week!

# 60 SouthernBrick @ 02/28/10 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by t11


	Well, the latest* we should have to wait according to my mathematical model would be friday. But Rob hinted the embargo lifts first week of March. Which is this week!*

Lets see...Combine, check. More info on BB, check. My junkie football habit is being fueled. Can't wait to try out the new product in May.

« Previous 1 234 Next »

More Links

Backbreaker Preview (Xbox 360 Magazine)