By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ka-pi96 said:
DonFerrari said:
Azerth said:
so since were playing the hypothetical game lets say EA puts mass effect in the vault and in a couple years bioware breaks off and becomes there own company and with get 100% ownership of everything mass effect, and they want it removed from the vault. if they have the clause then they can remove the game without being sued or owning people anything. but without the clause EA would either A) be sued by bioware for not removing it or B) be sued by the customers because they didn't have the clause saying that they could remove content.


And how would bioware would break from EA without EA consent?

They would also need a lot of cash to buy themselves back, especially if they wanted to take Mass Effect with them.

But I think the point is just to show why they have clauses like that in their TOS, better to be safe than sorry.


Yep... no policy is really bad untill they decide to enforce it... So yep it isn't necessary to judge ahead of time.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."