Marvel Rivals: This is Illegal..
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 тра 2024
- Asmongold Clips / Asmongold Reacts To: New Overwatch clone game Marvel Rivals made creators receiving a simple key sign a contract that gives away their right to negatively review the game. This is not for a sponsor with a monetary compensation, but only for receiving a simple key
Clip from / a_seagull
On this Asmongold Clips UA-cam Channel you'll never quit finding all the funny Asmongold Moments with Mcconnell and the best Asmongold Highlights from the most popular games, like: Baldur's Gate 3, Starfield, Blizzard's Diablo 4, Dragonflight & Hardcore Classic WoW, the record breaking MMORPG FFXIV, Path of Exile 2, sneak peeks from Gameplay of the upcoming Riot MMO and playthroughs of many other popular games like Hogwarts Legacy, Final Fantasy 16, Elden Ring and more. Also Asmongold Reacts to a lot of content, such as World Record Speed Run of games, Blizzard Drama, "Asmongold AI", VTubers, and videos of some of the most interesting creators like penguinz0, Internet Historian, Emiru, Dunkey, Linus Tech Tips and more. Asmon is also known for his "The True Story of Asmongold", "Asmongold $2 Pizza" and "Asmongold $2 Steak" videos, the legendary Transmog Competitions and Mount Off competitions, Ban Appeals, Media Share streams, Reddit Recap Reactions and much more.
► Asmongold TV: / @asmontv
► Twitch: / zackrawrr
Editor: Daily Dose of Asmongold
Contacts:
/ dasmongold
dailydoseofasmongoldyt@gmail.com - Ігри
saying "my game is bad" without saying "my game is bad" lol
Exactly, lmao!
Smells like Disney spirit.
Just like saying “I got social credits to silence criticism” without saying “I got social credits to silence criticism”
It's easy: just stay quiet for a moment, and say "I'm *not saying* Marvel Rivals is bad, *but..."* and another moment of staying quite.
-And *CUT.*
Yeah there's no way that they would be that concerned with negative reviews if they were proud of the product they had made.
If a game cant stand up to objective review there is no reason to endorse it.
Or play/ publicise it. Anyone doing that are either sell outs or unaware what they signed up to. I doubt it would stand up in court if you stated the obejectively (bad) facts
It's a closed Alpha not a, anywhere near, finished product...
It's just from content creators though, since they technically pay them with keys
there is no objective review. watch as they will make excuses on objective vs subjective
Dragon's Dogma 2 perfect example, anybody who played the game knows the attempt at review bombing was waaay over the top.
Not allowing negative reviews is genuinely the gaming equivalent of 1984
Was looking for this comment just for a good laugh 😂
Can't wait for a drone to fly by and shine an ad into my window for the new marvel game in 2034
I wouldn't say "literal." You can still use your power as a consumer and just not buy the game, or get a chargeback. Yea it's shitty for a company to hide this in their terms, but everyone is a vocal game reviewer now, so even a kid who might enjoy won't buy it if a streamer doesn't like it.
Why would you negatively review a unfinished product? Imagine a chef lets you walk into a their kitchen for a bit.
And you're like "i dont like the unfinished cake."
Like.... what did you expect?
If this game comes out and it's another fallout 76 no mans sky situation, sure that sucks. But seriously why give a negative rating over 7 months before it's release. I can understand criticism and citing things they can improve on but. Final rating or review is something that should be saved for when the game officially released.
As soon as you consider that NetEase is a Chinese corporation, it should all make sense.
"we're banning criticism... because the game we made was good..." ...???
Trust us we got Sweetbabyinc to make sure it's inclusive enough for all.
So, no criticism allowed, basically
No, "negative criticism" allowed. Praise is allowed.
Exactly. You can only worship.
How CCP of them...
And just like that: I have no interest in playing this game anymore.
I was already on the fence about it, but this just seals the deal.
@@polerli18 netease is from China clearly 😂
Wow imagine being banned for Constructive criticism/feedback, it's like Randy Pitchford all over again that he'd rather hear compliments and ignore negative reception and feedback on how to improve the game.
You are not, you agreeing to not doing that if you check the box, thats all, learn to read xd if you know because you read, you just not agreeing thats all, that means you don't want to play this game :) be happy
@@sraitama9412 you do know that it's strictly illegal's under the consumer review fairness act right? even if you check the box having the clause be there in the first place can get the studio in trouble
I can feel they about to replace the whole female model to 600pounds obese girl
That's the dream to them.
The walls started to crumble when UA-cam lost dislikes.
@@AlchemicSoul I love how some people use return dislike. Bringing back important feature
They are yelling "My game sucks but don't tell anyone"
I mean I've been playing the alpha and it's been really fun honestly. I think they just took an extreme approach to fixing the problem that is- streamers chat's mindlessly agreeing with them and spreading similar press despite knowing nothing about it.
They are yelling my game MIGHT suck
it seems fun maybe they are scared people will meme on it for being like overwatch, because the agreement also says you can't compare it to other games
@@itsShelleyyTV what if you genuinely don't like something about the game? your not even allowed to mention that on your stream, your only option is to act like it's a great game regardless of your opinion
the best multiplayer games are those that have been refined through years of player feedback
@@lilwintery6434 First let me say again, I don't think their approach to this is very thought out. And.. it certainly does suck to be a content creator for this, but it's not like streamers are the only people giving feedback. Like I said it's just we live in a world where people look up to others, and streamers hold a lot of power in that regard because many people on Twitch, etc., will simply agree with the streamer they watch because they like them. Not saying that's something I participate in but that's just the way it is. Once again, it isn't the approach I would have taken.
I mean tbh I'm not surprised there's controversy for something loosely related to overwatch, but also it seems half the reason they chose to follow through with this decision as well is because they are retroactively giving creators a bunch of alpha keys, and I've never really seen someone who's sponsored that way, be able to give a full honest review except for some companies.
Idk I guess I don't really think this is a big deal, streamers shouldn't be held so important to a game's state. Hold your own opinion end of story
Illegal conditions in contracts are not legally enforceable regardless of whether or not you signed/accepted it.
Legality is a matter of how much money the sides have
Why would this be illegal?
@@NihilHS Well that's a bootlicking face if I ever saw one
@@NihilHSfreedom of speach?
That thing cancel culture forgot about 5 years ago?
Yeah that
@@notme3603 There's no state action in a private contract so freedom of speech isn't implicated.
CONFIRMED ILLEGAL: "consumer review fairness act For example, in an online transaction, it would be illegal for a company to include a provision in its terms and conditions that prohibits or punishes negative reviews by customers."
Except this isn't a product available for the general public yet bruh, it's a closed Alpha and they retain the right to incite clauses around the product
You are not a customer if you received the game for free
@@wraithhewell thats where you both are still incorrect. Because and i quote "in an online transaction" a transaction can be anything. You downloading fortnite and agreeing you get a product for free and they get to use your info to sell it. Previewing a game and beta testing it for free. They get your feedback and fix bugs that are found during beta. It is still within plausability of a transaction. Because you are recieving a good and your payment is playtesting and doing this work for them for free. I know my pfp is a troll face but even games in beta. Fall underneath this. Whether they want to believe it or not.
@@ereder1476 They are game testers, and living advertisements.
The word customer is the key point here. If they are giving you a free key, you aren't a customer. They can't stop someone from giving a negative review if they pay for it, but they can if they give it to you and you sign a contract.
Anti disparagement clause to get a review game code = The game is utter garbage. Review not even needed
from the images it is indeed terrible
it isnt lol stay mad
@@rux5903 imagine being something as lowly and pathetic as a corporate white knight xD
@@rux5903 complete your highschool then talk
@@rux5903 maybe not but its being real scummy, you do that either because you know your product is trash/a scam or you dont have faith in your product and you are going to pull the plug a little after its released and you are trying to get the max ammount of costumers(being free 2 play doesnt mean it dont cost you something, you are paying with info to sell to advertising companies)
Fun fact: An EULA like this is not legally enforceable.
or at least that clause is likely to get struck
i'd be shocked if they failed to include a severence clause to protect the rest tho - that's just standard boilerplate you see even in stuff like independent website development contracts.
"How to activate the Streisand effect"
It's that The Critic gag again. It's either "good" or "excellent" and if you don't like it you rate it as "good"
I understood that reference!
Well, maybe we can give it something like "here's 5 star, because it's bad we hated it"
That’s a lack of imagination… “Not Good” does not equal “Bad” or “Negative”. Get a thesaurus.
And "good" become a "bad"... and after you cant say this is good game 😂😂😂😂😂
Can't wait untill someone signs the contract "under duress" and then leaves a negative review anyway. Have fun litigating that mess.
Big corpos don't want criticism, it's as if they were warning that the worst is coming.
oh it is coming dont worry....since therye ready to make the world function through AI....no need for us anymore and therye gonna prove it pretty soon id say
Haven’t you seen what corporate consolidation have been doing to our world in the last 40 years?
The worst is already here
@@azpont7275 It can always get worse, never forget that even if you can't fathom it
@@mr.dynamite1 I mean, I can. I live under a GOP praised fascist regime.
What I mean by, is that the capitalism caused mass extinction event has already started. It is here already. Sure it'll get worse, but it's here.
How ironic that I'm just now getting through the Cyberpunk story, right around the time you start openly opposing big corps
The irony being the Cyberpunk itself was a game ruined by a big corp which was greedy and clueless and pushed it out before it was ready, and the people who ultimately got punished were the mid and low level programmers and artists, not the lead devs and definitely not the suits.
'Tis the season
Game companies are in heat and are competing to court the most negative attention
The gaming industry has been snowballing the Ls this month frl
"No Negative Reviews"
Reviews: "This game inspired my paraplegic body to stand up, walk over to my computer, and ask for a refund. 5 stars :D"
You can't pay for it though... Is just a closed alpha
Are your reading comprehension skills so low you can't even understand? the contract is only for content creators and the criticism has to for an actual reason not subjective like it stated.
When the developers say that you can't give a negative review on their game that alone is already a big red flag.
It's their way of effectively silencing those with complaints, constructive or not.
People fresh out of high school going to jail for having a little bit of weed but major corporations break serious laws and nothing happens besides the occasional fine that they will make back the same month of being fined
the only way a fine would actually hurt a company is if it was a % of how much they make instead of a flat fee
Tax the rich bro
The systems made to benefit the wealthy. Nothing will change unless the people act
Rich privileges.
or they dont even pay the fine and make it a tax write off
So when brands tried to do this with Amazon products (free products for 5 star only reviews) the ftc stepped in and changed the rules to make it illegal. That's wild they're doing this.
There was an I-Carly episode about this exact same thing. They signed a contract to show off some high tech shoes and when they wanted out of it legally they just showed off all the bad things about it and just made it seem good, so they technically didn't break TOS.
Well it’s simple, signing something that is unlawful means you get the free thing and they get in trouble if they try to enforce it, so maybe stream it and shit talk it if it’s something legitimate like asmon said
He doesn’t have the balls to be the martyr here
It's not illegal while in a closed status and not generally available. Not to mention there's not a judge in the country that will rule against their corporate overlords.
@@Mashamazzi...or the means
I rate it as the used toilet paper after lunch at taco bell so basically annihilated lol
@@CubeInspector Not being "generally available" does not negate consumer and fair trade practice laws. The vast majority of things sold are not "generally available" to the public.
Another game that will be forgotten in the next month and nobody will hear ever again of this piece of trash that nobody asked once more.
Nah, we’ll keep hearing shit about it like we have been for the past, several month.
Nah, this game isn't going to be forgotten.
Nah
Nah i dont think so tbh
@@bakedandbeaded I'm putting down $100 that we'll hear more about scummy corpo practices than any actual game it has to offer.
I have a hard time believing this is legal and a clause any court would actually enforce
Anything that is published to public is open to defamation, it is actually illegal to put such a clause in the contract.
Well thats a non-enforcable clause if I ever heard one, not legally anyway. Technically you can get banned just because they want to but thats just gonna be a Streisand effect moment.
You really think the company that basically wrote copyright law is gonna be "non-enforceable"?
@@wrongthinker843 yes a common tactic is to use scare tactics with things that are 100% not enforceable because it often works all the same. but even if anyone ignores it they know the result is that they will never again receive anything from future games. and these people depend on reviewing stuff to earn an income.
@@wrongthinker843 Just as kralmir said, it happens INCREDIBLY often. So yes I do indeed think that.
@@wrongthinker843you'd be surprised how ballsy (and stupid) the suits in large corporations can get
@@wrongthinker843 It is non-enforceable though just like many other things we see companies do one example being you know the stickers that say "warranty void if removed" they mean nothing as in most places including the US removing them doesn't actually void the warranty.
Saying they aren’t allowed to give “subjective negative reviews” is such a cope out since it can be argued anything is subjective since it comes from a person’s perspective.
This is how freedom of speech dies, under the corporations’ boot.
It’s already like this in Japan and you really don’t want it to be like in Japan.
Criticizing a corporation (or even just someone rich/powerful), with valid reasoning and even proof can get you in deep trouble. You can even get sued. Streamers that live in Japan always avoid mentioning companies during controversies for fear of getting sued by multi-billion corporations.
Somebody would just have to argue that they're pointing out objective flaws with the game.
freedom of speech has always only ever applied to not getting arrested for silence, protests, swearing, advertising, or stuff like burning the flag. it's never applied to private property. I wish people would look up what it means. The actual term is censorship.
Freedom of speech died so much earlier than Japan. USA has like massive loyal customers like Apple and Google or other big tech. So what. It's everywhere now. People are even ok with Microsoft buying Blizzard. It's funny 80s Cyberpunk theme stories is real now.
To be honest I don't even care anymore. Around every 10 years people bring this up and there is no action. people seems to forget about the past.
@vanguard812-vf7hr and that will only get worse as they continue to flood you with misinformation and AI smear campaigns or fake happenings to keep you worried and scared and confused.
Just another good excuse to never touch this game ever.
Pretty sure some countries make it illegal to even have a clause like that
*DON'T HURT OUR FEELINGS!*
-Marvel
One has to remember, Marvel was purchased by Disney in 2009...
This is not Marvel. Marvel sells their IP. Netease has to pay for it. It's Netease the one that sets this conditions. You don't see shit like this for Marvel SNAP, or Marvel Duel, just to set 2 recent examples. Don't just talk out of your ass.
*Netease
That how are hard their failing
The bigger they are the harder they fail
I've literally not heard about this game until now and it makes sense why. This game is going no where.
I'm going to have disagree with you. You're just not in the loop.
@@andy.jehoshaphatI’m going to have to disagree with you. You’re in the wrong loop
The game is just reskinned overwatch anyway.
@@andy.jehoshaphatWow another team game where the community will surely be non toxic and the game won’t nickel and dime you. DOA.
@@ReigoVassalit's better than overwatch, I'll give it that.
This is basically an unspoken rule when it comes to these kind of things anyways, major publications for game reviews go soft on AAA games to ensure they continue to receive pre-release access to future upcoming titles, or else their competitors will get all that traffic from having the pre-release info instead.
Friendly reminder that illegal clauses in contracts are either
1. Unenforceable
2. Negates the entire contract
Sign it and let it settle in court (if it gets there). Be sure to op out of arbitration so you can become part of a class action, if that happens later.
That certainly speaks to their confidence.
now i see why game review score always so high despite the game are actually dog****.
It literally is illegal. Wtf? Do they have no legal counsel? Its insane.
They do have legal counsel there are few issues at play though, legality of such clause in the beta/alpha where game's technicaly not on sale yet thus playing it you're not a 'customer' protected by the act you're likely refering to, is iffy and might or might not be illegal depending on judge's whim.
Now should the game be actually on sale, it would be 100% illegal. It won't stop the companies from putting illegal/unenforcable clauses in their UA because... even if unenforcable it's often enough to scare people from doing the thing they don't want you to do.
If I let's say threaten you with idk lighting up your home if you step on my lawn... Even if I don't have the means of lighting up your home, it is likely you will stay away from my lawn.
Ironically enough, the game is actually really fun lol. Especially for being in closed alpha, it is absurdly polished. As far as their restrictive clauses in their creator program, they have addressed it and are working to fix it and loosen the clauses. They have also reinstated certain creators who were banned for breaking these clauses. So not only is the game actually fun, they are responding to the community and fixing their wrongs instead of doubling down. Big W for Marvel Rivals devs.
I have a feeling there's this new tactic by big corpas where they just now know that an average gamer doesnt not read anything now hence they use this to their advantage
In some countries, that would be an illegal clause essentially once they actually start selling it though.
So in other words they want paid actors
Even better: Free Actors
Yeah. They don’t want people to compare it to Marvel Vs Capcom 1 & 2. THE REAL OG MARVEL FIGHTING GAMES.
I swear, they want people to forget its existence.
Drama aside, that looks like an alpha stage mobile game ad on Instagram.
This is actively going on since years, it's just that this is the first time a corporation puts it on paper. Angry Joe is not geting review copies since years, because he is not willing to do blind corporate dicksucking, unlike most Twitch-streamers for example.
Why would you want to give a review key to someone who's going to crap on your garbage game before release? That would honestly just be stupid, but I'd respect that at least.
@FEVRobert well if you actually watched his videos you would know that this isn't true. He has positive reviews. And he usually reviews AAA games, which are usually lacking many aspects.
@@nicklasveva Nah angry joe is just a massive hater of a majority of things, he hates stuff more often than not.
They basically made a law to not talk sh*t about their game 😂
,,law '' what? Xd you understand what law is?
It's not a law. You can literally put almost anything in a contract. Whether the stuff in the contract can hold up in court however, is a different discussion.
@@HettesKvek true, internet MOB is just smth else, its even fannier ehen Asmon can say smth stupid that make no sens and all people in chat just spaming ,right, true brother TRUEE,, :c sad reality we livin in...
Not a law, it's a clause but close enough in terms of "Do this, negative consequences will happen."
It would definitely be thrown out in court. The issue is that just going to court would cost a lot
This is to get access to pre-alfa.
Essentially this is the same as sponsored event.
just remember this went through multiple people and was approved
Those agreements would get laughed out of a court... When I buy a game, the seller of the game agrees to my TOS of me bitching and moaning and trashing the game as I see fit..
Seagull! He was in my gw2 guild many years ago. He's a good guy and really good at games
was the attack wanda used just zenyatta right click?
Props to the people who did their do diligence
The fucking chat saying Ed Sheran LMFAO ICANT 0:19
Ed beercan
Seagull's chat every now and then will call him "Fed Sheran". True story..
Church: Wait, that's Illegal.
Disney/Marvel is telling everybody to get Sarge'd. Rough times.
Stan is probably having a epilepsy attack in his tomb.
Watching this 20 hours later, open twitch and see Shroud playing marvel rivals.
How interesting.
It looks like utter garbage reskin nonsense.
this is why they made this rule lol
"Overwatch and tf2 are already popular hero shooters so no one can make any more hero shooters."
Meanwhile COD every year...
Don’t be emotional now. The game itself is good which is EVEN worse because then why would they make this rule?
13 second with 3 views, bro is cooking
Now that's a trend that's need to happen
Finally the reverse version is getting popular, he didnt fall off HE FELL ON 🔥🔥🔥‼️‼️
Ok I heard enough. "Summon the elector counts and bring me to my men!"
I wonder if you could get sued from breaking that clause or they just take the access away.
Its a closed alpha...
I hope Charlie (moist critical) talks about this.
Ironically they reviewed their own game with the clause
Shroud was playing it last night and seemed to be having a good time.
MARVEL being MARVEL again lol 🤣
I mean to be fair all things considered, this is not actually illegal. Any sponsor works this way, and this "clause" in contracts has existed for literal years.
I guess the only "scummy" part you can say about this, is the fact the creators aren't being paid for this "sponsor" of the game -- which is what it effectively boils down to.
All it's saying is just "hey, be professional, don't be an ass." -- if they were being paid, it would just mean "hey, be professional, if you're an ass we won't pay you for the time spent.".
Creators aren't obliged to even say that the game is good, they're just not allowed to disparage the product -- once again how every single paid contract works.
I don't understand why people are getting so butthurt over what has already existed in paid contracts for literal years, yet now it's suddenly a problem. Again, only the fact it's not being paid, is the more scummy part about it, but doesn't make it illegal.
Take Raid Shadow Legends for example, do you think anyone who got a sponsor from them actually likes that game?
You don't have to say the game is good, you just can't disrespect the product you are being PAID to promote, that's all.
Corpos and any video game publisher does not want to give out keys and sponsors to people that are just going to give their game massive negative publicity, which is why this clause in contracts exist in the first place. Doesn't mean you're somehow obliged to praise the game like no tomorrow and call it game of the year, it's that simple. Just don't be an ass lol.
To be fair, it's in Alpha so I can see why as people expect it to work out of the box
Forgot the part where the martyr has to basically die for it to work hah
Someone should make a review praising the game while being as sarcastic as possible. “I absolutely love that this game looks and runs like it’s from 20 years ago. It brings back the nostalgia :)”
Well I haven’t signed anything, fuck the game, and fuck the fakes.
Man if they're so worried about a game being bad that they state you can't leave negative reviews then it's probably sht to begin with. Was actually kinda looking forward to this game
Someone called him Ed Beercan in chat and im dying 😂
this is illegal. Consumer review fairness act makes it illegal for a company to punish or prohibit negative reviews
That's why everyone was praising the shit game marvel snap. They weren't allowed not to.
"Here's a review key! But don't review it unless you like it."
First rule of an artist:
Prepared to be critically embarrassed and loved at the same time
No views after 12 seconds, bro fell off
Joined 3 years ago, no bitches, you never fell off because you never had anything. Not even an original thought.
I'm definitely going to be reading terms and conditions from now on.
I got confused when I heard Seagulls voice in the background, took me back to when overwatch was great with him going ham as Genji.
Translation: "We have absolutely 0 faith in that our game is in any way a decent experience, so we'll force you to not talk shit about it."
So this is probably not gonna be seen but so people know. This is actually incorrect. Only ones receiving a contract are those being made OFFICIAL CONTENT CREATORS for Marvel Rivals. If you sign up for alpha you just get a code nothing to sign or agree to like that.
this is how it works in japan for all games. Its illegal to ruin the image of a company even if you state facts and you also need permission to show footage for ny game for any reason
Literally illegal to prevent you from coitizing a product. Give them a day or two before a federal lawsuit shuts them down.
Considering how quick people are to bomb a game simply over their favorite content creators opinions. I feel like releasing early access that is going to be subject to change, and expecting people who participate to understand that is a brilliant strategy.
All they need is one Asmon to say "dead game, no point, worthless" -- and suddenly tens of thousands of people are down to trust that phrasing. If you got an issue. Send in the complaint, or suggestion to the devs. Not a community of people who won't do anything more after hearing it; other than being an echo chamber of hatred for the devs efforts.
To me. All I read is. "If you got an issue with it, smd, don't whine like a victim. Come solve it with us".
Asmon/Seagull was not the crossover I expected to see today but I'm happy to see it.
Is it that important??
@@GoznerPeter seagull is underrated
@@lilwintery6434 Is it important?
>not reading your contract before signing
Reminds me of Square Enix asking streamers to thank them for the key every 15 minutes or whatever.
Maoist China would be so proud.
Like the idea you're not allowed SATIRE either, absolutely crazy, makes you imagine the person who wrote this up is a literal cartoon villain.
I have dealt with contract law before. That clause is just vague enough that it likely won't be considered enforceable in court.
but you get to play as your favorite Marbel characters: Zinc Male, Badgerine, Arachnoid Guy, Camouflaged Lady, Corporal Mexico, Mauve Magician. what more can you ask?
i would love to see a lawyer to go through it and call out everything wrong
"Holy shit, Iron man just one shot me with a rocket! So cool and balanced! right?!"
I mean if it was a Hammer industries rocket it would tickle your health, Stark Industries Rockets will kill you
So we now have confirmation that being compared to TF2 and Overwatch is so financially damaging that companies are forcing creators to sign legal paperwork to not compare their games
That's especially sad considering that TF2 won by doing nothing.
ed sheeran with 3 months worth of beer
Wait until you read the EULA for Homeworld 3. All 3 of them.
Thats pretty much the normal Disney practice. They do similar things with the journalists during the press screening of movies and red carpet events.
If you say something bad, you get blacklisted and you will never get any press tickets for a Disney product ever again. This happened to a lot of Star Wars people and is the main reason that you have this exclusive bunch of yes-men on the red carpet now.
This scared a lot of people back then. Imagine giving Captain Marvel a bad review and then you don't get press tickets for Endgame.
Bro is gonna play the game off stream so much he will pre-order all battle-passes.
That won’t hold up in court.
To be fair, Marvel's Avengers was developed by an AAA company (Square-Enix) and it looked and played like shit as well.
its def something marvel corporate related, im sure the people that actually made the game would want feedback on whats good/bad
"Overwatch 0.5" 🤣
that's completly non-enforcable.
"bellitlling the. gameplay"
I'm so triggered that they put a fullstop right after word "the" and the word "gameplay" did not even start with an uppercase"G" bruh 💀
Yeah, I know it's silly, but still. This is supposed to be a very important contract after all.
The clause for that is when you become a partner in the same fashion you can be a cod partner or have a vid sponsored by them, not for actually playing the alpha, NDA doesnt have to be signed to play
if you want a key you have to sign it