Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About Lurdiak

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. No amount of evidence will ever satisfy the conspiracy-mongers, but it's nice of Vincente to try to set the record straight.
  2. I cannot believe that people here are still accusing illfonic and gun media of malicious intent after reading Wes' heartfelt post on the topic. You're all fools who understand nothing about game development. It sickens me to see you treat Wes like a grifter just because you're too stubborn to accept reality
  3. I don't deny that this seriously hampers the future of the game and that it'll probably start dying off due to not being able to add new content, but I think it's a bit soon to have a "going out of business" sale.
  4. Dead because of a lawsuit against the rights holder. Or did you miss that part? I'm very sorry to tell you this, but this game not being up to your expectations doesn't make it a scam.
  5. Oh, so it's just wishful thinking from bitter fools. Got it. I thought there might be an actual reason that a small developer that made a very profitable game on a shoestring budget might have issues in the future.
  6. No offense but when a developer says they're not adding new content ever again, you should probably believe them.
  7. They've repeatedly said they will work on bug fixes even though they can't make new content. I don't know why you're just assuming that's a lie.
  8. That isn't true. You're confusing the initial lawsuit with the new claim Miller filed. While the initial lawsuit didn't affect the development of this game, the new one does.
  9. I don't think they're legally allowed to say that. Even if the lawsuit is somehow resolved tomorrow and the game continues as if nothing happened, saying this is a possibility right now would count as marketing the hypothetical future content. There are likely provisions in the court order itself to prevent this. To use a very simplified example, I can't say that something I'm making MIGHT have Mickey Mouse in it in the future. Disney could come after me for making such a claim.
  10. Promising that content they're not legally able to add currently might become available later as a way of maintaining sales would probably count as violating the court order, regardless of if the team internally thinks that's a possibility.
  11. But the DLC would still be attached to a game literally called Friday the 13th. You can't make a case that you're not profiting off the name in that situation. The only way to make money off new content without violating the court order would be if it was part of a separate game.
  • Create New...