You now have permission to yell “I’ll see you in court” at your copy of Killzone: Shadow Fall.
A class-action lawsuit against Sony Computer Entertainment for misrepresenting the graphical resolution of its PlayStation 4 shooter Killzone is proceeding, according to Entertainment Law Digest and Courthouse News. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen refused Sony’s request to dismiss plaintiff Douglas Ladore’s case against the company. The court argued that the publisher failed to adequately address Ladore’s complaints.
[aditude-amp id="flyingcarpet" targeting='{"env":"staging","page_type":"article","post_id":1627205,"post_type":"story","post_chan":"none","tags":null,"ai":false,"category":"none","all_categories":"games,","session":"A"}']In his suit, Ladore claims that Sony advertised Killzone as having a resolution composed of 1,080 horizontal lines in its multiplayer mode. But the game that eventually shipped did not run at that standard.
“Gamers quickly noticed and complained that Killzone’s multiplayer graphics were blurry to the point of distraction,” reads the plaintiff’s complaint.
Sony, in its effort to get the case dismissed, claimed that it did misrepresent the quality of Killzone’s graphics. The company also argued that Ladore’s case isn’t covered under the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and that Ladore failed to adequately prove he relied on any particular misrepresentation to make his purchasing decision.
Chen disagreed with Sony on those points.
“The substantial majority of the arguments Sony raises in its motion to dismiss can be rejected for two simple reasons,” Chen wrote in his ruling. “Either Sony’s arguments ignore important factual allegations that are well pleaded in Ladore’s complaint, or Sony’s arguments require this court to construe the complaint in the light most favorable to Sony, rather than Ladore, who is entitled to the benefit of all reasonable inferences at this stage of the proceedings.”
The judge did agree with Sony on one point of contention. It has to do with the “economic loss rule,” which is a standard that prevents tort law from applying to cases where no physical damages or personal injuries occur. Chen explained that Ladore’s arguments failed to illustrate any non-economic damages.
Ladore will now have 30 days to submit a revised complaint.