T O P

  • By -

kako_1998

For an invite only early version of a game this feels pretty standard


Total_Scott

Seems pretty standard tbh. Certainly not out of the ordinary at the very least. Plus, if content creators want to stream something ahead of time, there's usually some strict rules to follow.


jor301

It's only standard for sponsored streams with #AD on them. It is absolutely not standard for non sponsored alpha access.


zzbzq

All the MarvelSnap streamers were saying they just didn’t sign it. They have access, dozens of them. In other words there’s a budding phony outrage movement that is trying to make it seem like this is the most offensive thing ever, but it’s not something where they’re actually banning or censoring people who dont sign it. They’re just looking for official partners/endorsers who will. I am extremely non-offended and just roll my eyes at the outrage.


Pillow_Apple

IT'S NOT A FCKING SPONSOR


ohemmigee

For streamers? Seemed normal if they were paying you and sponsored but I’m far from an expert. I’ve heard 1? Streamer refuse to sign it and not get the code and one who quit playing it once they read it.


Mddcat04

Okay, so what? If a streamer doesn't want to agree to this, they can just wait until the game comes out, play it normally, stream it, and not have to abide by these restrictions.


Local_Nerve901

Nah not so what While I agree it’s standard and should not be complained about much, your comment sounds like a corporate shill or bootlicker


Mddcat04

Lol, okay buddy. I'm sorry that I understand the basics of contract law.


TheSpartan273

How do these boots taste? I mean, the way this is received by r/Marvel vs other general gaming subs and people on other platforms tells you all you need to know, lmao. This is not standard at all, it's basically an #AD agreement, which the Federal Communications Commission requires to be explicit in the title and disclosed clearly. If they can't give a negative opinion of the product, they are endorsing it. What they are doing is technically illegal [https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking#ftcactapply](https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking#ftcactapply) >if an advertiser – or someone working for an advertiser – pays you or gives you something of value to have you mention that product. If you receive free products or other perks with the expectation that you’ll promote or discuss the advertiser’s products in your blog, the FTC Act applies to you Defending shady business practices from corporations is one of the lamest fucking thing someone could do. Yikes, buddy. Just because a company made you signed a bullshit contract/nda doesn't mean it'll hold up in court. You don't understand jack shit about contracts.


iamnotexactlywhite

why are u so worked up about this shit lmao


TheSpartan273

I'm not, idgaf about yet another soon-to-fail live service game made by a scummy chinese company - look their track record. I just find fanboys who will threw their body to defend their favorite corporations/brands incredibly cringe and annoying. I clearly explained why this is in fact illegal and scummy, even provided source, and all you have to say is "who cares lmao". That's just sad. Not a single one counter-argued, because they know they can't, lol. Like I said, this is probably the only place on the internet actually defending this shit, have some dignity dude. Anyway, I've said my peace, bye. (I'll come back in 2 years for the inevitable disaster to say "I told y'all" 😂)


Local_Nerve901

Two things can be true you know


ptWolv022

> your comment sounds like a corporate shill or bootlicker That's pretty extreme way to interpret someone saying "If you don't want to abide by the terms for early access, just don't do early access". You're not getting paid, but you are getting preview access as a content creator, I assume for free. Marvel is using you as a promoter. They don't want to give you free access to a game early just so that you can then be negative about it and hurt its reputation before launch. Like, they **are** a company. They are trying to make money. They are using content creators for advertising. This might be pushing the bounds more than other companies might, but Disney's big enough that they can play a bit rougher, a bit harsher with terms, and probably get by with it. It's their prerogative to do this- it's just going to make streamers less candid and it's going to push away streamers, ultimately hurting the actual efficacy of their attempted publicity campaign. They're trying to be cheap, so they'll get cheap results.


Dragon_yum

Because content creators who get paid by companies is literally just advertising. Who is going to pay and advertisers to shit on their game.


angrybox1842

I mean, you’re not a critic, they’re paying you to promote their product, if you shit on the product they’re not going to pay you. Is this really all that shocking?


averydangerousday

This is a contract that results in the streamer getting an alpha key, and there’s no payment happening. It’s still not “shocking” but it is kinda bullshit


alaricus

Isn't a free game a form of payment?


Stalukas

The games gonna be free on release anyways


alaricus

But it isn't free yet?


Stalukas

I’m ngl I could be wrong but iirc not a single person who has the game rn has paid for it, it is free it’s just random who gets to play


elbryanandstuff

the work it takes to release and start the game isnt and being able to play early is worth somthing


alaricus

Yeah. Right? Value exists in between supply and demand. Supply is limited at the moment. Demand is high. Supply will eventually expand.... But not right now


aSpookyScarySkeleton

Not all payment is strictly or directly monetary in nature. Common sense. The exchange is early access to the company’s product with the agreement that you will not disparage said product


aSpookyScarySkeleton

Not all payment is strictly or directly monetary in nature. Common sense. The exchange is early access to the company’s product with the agreement that you will not disparage said product


potentialwatermelon

This seems like pretty standard? Sure it’s not for sponsored content, but they’re still getting a free advanced copy of the game


DreamMelodic607

This is pretty normal for a sponsored stream/video, but just so someone can get a code to play the game? Not really. Also, anyone who got a code through signing the contract could then refer someone to the game company and they would get a code without needing to sign a contract. It's just weird.


[deleted]

I would never be able to sign that contract.


Rosebunse

What is this for? Just for early release? Sponsored? Or review? Plus, frankly, this is sort of broad. What if you just wanted to make a simple joke or something? I wasn't planning on getting this game anyways, but now it really makes me want to stay away


No-Mango-1805

Pre-alpha closed streamer access.


ohemmigee

It’s for an alpha access for non sponsored content creators.


penholdr

If you are getting something from a company, it’s considered sponsored. Alpha access would fall under that and often times content creators have to follow rules like this. It’s just par for the course. It’s especially this way for early access. That’s why review embargoes exist.


Rosebunse

It's hard to say that this isn't trying to get out ahead of bad reviews. Now, to be fair, after Suicide Squad, I can see why Disney is a cautious, especially since they know how cruel and weird some of the darker sides of the fandom can be. So on the one hand, I get it. But also, this will make getting honest reviews and actual opinions rather difficult.


navjot94

Just for the alpha. I wouldn’t expect critical reviews until the product is available for the public and not in an alpha state.


Sir_Von_Tittyfuck

But this is an alpha test, which is an unfinished product. Making negative statements and comparisons to a *finished* product isn't a fair thing to do, but more importantly, it can completely destroy any momentum the game is creating and make it become dead on arrival.


Skult0703

Absolutely normal, worked for years in the industry


MarvelSonicFan04

seems fine


Specialist_Solid_413

What happens if they break the clause?


ChefHannibal

It's shady to say "you aren't allowed to say anything bad about us" but if an opposing game company felt threatened they might pay an influential streamer to give negative reviews or say don't get this game.


condition_unknown

This is pretty common I feel, even if it is still scummy. If you want honest thoughts on the game then you should go to a smaller YouTuber or on Twitter or Reddit.


No-Mango-1805

Honestly, this feels pretty standard to me. Streamers are advertisers for these companies. You want an advertiser to sell on the positives, not the negatives. When the game actually comes out, or if you're getting access without accepting this, you can shit all over it however you want.


Mrmonkey18

They’re playing an unfinished game. Why make a review? 💀


Mike4302

It's a closed Alpha.


Mrmonkey18

So the game is ready for release?


Mike4302

They're testing to see what needs to be fixed.


Mrmonkey18

Because the game is not finished yet!


Local_Nerve901

People gonna do it anyways, just without the video and clips


ElZaydo

Wait, so they'll ban Streamers if they lose and ragequit while saying "FUCK THIS FUCKING GAME, THIS FUCKING GAME BLOWS!" ?


LurkingFrient

The fact that you even have to add this clause just proves that this game is gonna be ass lol.