Hmm... A perfectly neutral review with a share of the wording from the contract is nothing but factual, and I believe could be argued to be non disparaging?

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

No, disparaging is disparaging, even if it's warranted. But, if I were a small streamer who got a key, I would just repeat the non-disparagement clause any time I saw something obviously broken.

They can stop me saying anything negative but that doesn't cover body language (they might try to sue but they wouldn't ever be able to prove it to the degree required unless I had posted something like this explanation, and even then it's dicey), and I don't see anything in there about a minimum number of positive sentences of words to hit. God help these chucklefucks if they ever run into a Djinni or a cursed monkey's paw.

[–] Spaceinv8er@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

This is just my opinion but most comic book based games suck anyway.

[–] Veedem@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’m assuming it’s with regards to the Play Test which is in very early stages and shouldn’t be judged as completed. Seems fair enough if it’s nowhere near complete

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] InquisitiveApathy@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago

I was in his stream when people sent him the contract they signed just to get the key. Wild. The game is janky looking as fuck so they definitely know how bad it is.

[–] JCreazy@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago

It's one of the reasons that nobody says anything bad about the product that their sponsor provided to them. Either that or people don't want to ruin their relationship with their sponsors so they will talk highly of a product even if it isn't good.

[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 1 points 6 months ago

It did say "subjective negative reviews". I would take that to mean that strictly objective negative reviews are perfectly acceptable.

load more comments