The game is also highly reliant on spending actual money to affect the odds.
I'm not a legal expert but it would seem like there might various violations, depending how the country implements sweepstakes laws. It seems like they don't care about odds and haven't considered that you can't just mess with a sweepstakes without suspending/remaking it first. I've heard in the past that not liable clauses are not always accepted/effective and do not always removal liability.
I don't really care, since chances are so low, but thought this is noteworthy.
Valve would just give everyone a free game and they'd shut up
Ethan Cruz
So, how can we sue these fuckers?
Austin Jenkins
go back
Aaron Bennett
It's nothing more then than just video games, also each team gets them anyway regardless and you can switch teams if you really want to
Brandon Harris
Hire a firm for tens of thousands and start a class action. Force to settle for a million or two, give half to lawyers, some free game for the rest of participants.
Alexander Torres
You cannot switch teams, and no each team doesn't get the same reward. Only top 3 teams randomly selected X number of players get a game from wishlist.
You can affect the odds if you spend money, for example if someone was insane enough they could in theory spend 50k and attempt to win in a single race, but now they modified the odds you see. So if you are on team corgi you need to spend 20 times as much.
Liam Smith
Okay this is epic
Jose Turner
>lol thoughts? be my internet hate machine army xD
I think you need to isekai yourself, chang.
Kayden Nguyen
have corgi
Jason Edwards
Setting up a game with teams and competition between those was always going to end up with people gaming the system, particularly since it was known before the sales started. Thus its a heavy handed but technically fair way to balance the sheer power of the majority. Of course once the people who tried to game the system got fucked, most just stopped which means their efforts are now worthless. And the corgi team is now completely unable to compete. Putting the odds back to normal would lead to the same problem. Obviously the game was meant to provide first and foremost a mean for steam to provoke a large amount of sales for the duration but they underestimated the amount of coordination people would get into. As such the original mistake was letting people choose their team rather than making it random. Bottom line if anyone really thought there was a real interest in this game they were retarded and need to stop. Crashing thing down is the best result, and maybe next year the sales will be more fair and not pseudo random shit.
Nathan Wright
Wait, there's a competition? I went to my wishlist, added whatever was finally fairly priced to the basket and checked out. What the fuck are you people doing with your lives?
Logan Stewart
fuck off tranny
Dylan Perez
Kill yourself, you shit-eating corporate drone
Nolan Stewart
it says "void where prohibited by law" so it's perfectly fine
Oliver Butler
>serious violations >in an optional event where you click to see the pig get a bigger number
Gabriel Davis
>Thoughts?
You guys are fucking idiots either way, slave all day good goy, we will give you a "free" game!
Anthony Watson
You don't think Valve canned Half-Life 3 to spend more on their legal department?
Carter Perry
Getting a little desperate, aren't we Tim?
Jaxson Cook
>I'm not a legal expert but stopped reading here
Christian Baker
>implies sales to be an actual standalone service >implies people don't buy games regardless you gotta go back
Yeah, I posted this yesterday. It's in gross violation of multiple sweepstakes laws in the US, EGREGIOUSLY and indefensibly so. It's the government that would sue them, not private citizens you fucking retard
>The game is also highly reliant on spending actual money to affect the odds. This is just false, after spending 60euros I got 6k boost. After playing CSGO I got 24k boost because of all the achievements I have gathered in that game. What Grand Prix relies on is participation.
Noah Morris
You can't require ANY purchase to affect ANY RATES in a sweepstakes ANYWHERE in the US as a for-profit company
Eli Baker
wrong, max capacity is increased by spending, it considered your past purchases. The points are easy to get, but you can't redeem them, and you lose a certain amount if your capacity which is influenced by spending is not high enough. I have hundreds of thousands of points from games I cannot redeem for example.
Joshua Richardson
Post proof
Parker Cooper
rules say that it's prior purchases not purchases from the sale. Then drivers manual say it's increases from the sale. I have no idea what is going on.
