"Beta Content is Allowed" does not mean "free-for-all on all datamined content".

[AirRaid]

I've deleted one "info dump" thread already.

If the information was found by datamining the executable or the other data files it does not belong on this forum.

[BluePineapple72]

Kinda wish I resisted the urge to read the story stuff :( hopefully this is old data and nothing relative to the game. I think this might be old material considering some music has been found in the data and the composer confirmed that is was old content that has nothing to do with the game anymore.

[Marrub]

Alrighty, sorry 'bout that.

[id.dav]

XD))) Yeah it was good idea to remove that topic....though I managed to read it)))
I liked what I read there)) There's nothing more to add))

[Almonds]

yyyeah I feel I should apologize as well. my b

[Marnetmar]

Spoiler

The final boss dies at the end of the game

[Deleted_Account]

Because of this Doom will be delayed until next year, thanks guys.

[id.dav]

Piper Maru said:

Because of this Doom will be delayed until next year, thanks guys.

Nahhh....who gives a damn about story anyway))))

[ShadesMaster]

This is only a Hunch, but I do believe that Olivia follows a Betruger-like route and 'transforms' into something... with more legs.....

Also a hunch... if people are disappointed by things such as the Rocket Launcher's lack of multiplayer power... I have a feeling that SNAPMAP will allow you to change it's numerical damage just as you can a monster's hitpoints, as well. For the monster tho that would be all instances of say 'imp' AND an individual 'boss' imp or two... maybe we can have one rocket launcher stronger than the other, tho I doubt the latter.

[rampancy]

i wish they wouldnt try to make a complex story, its liable to be awful.

[DoomzRules]

Just as long as we have demon variants with varying colours like in Diablo I'll be happy. =3

[wheresthebeef]

Good, the alpha leak pissed me off and seeing beta leaks starting to get leaked just disappointed me more.
Now if people don't start passing leaked beta info around nonchalant in posts that would be great.

[HavoX]

This really should be stickied.

[Almonds]

rampancy said:

i wish they wouldnt try to make a complex story, its liable to be awful.

bear in mind that the goal for ID regarding story in the game is that it bears as much importance as the player wants

plus it's not this utterly contrived five nights at freddy's level of spaghetti plot, it merely expands upon doomguy's backstory and whatnot, which is ultimately irrelevant to the game

plus the devs themselves stated on occasions that the story will mainly touch upon 'who you are and why you're here', not much else

[Quasar]

To think this was once the community that developed DeHackEd. >_>

[Linguica]

To be fair, that was for a game that was actually released, so the moral dimensions were different.

That said, I personally don't care if people want to discuss spoiler content, so long as they do it without actually linking to copyright-breaking stuff. But I'll follow AirRaid's lead.

[DoomzRules]

So what about if someone finds something in the code that we haven't heard of yet like a new gameplay feature, new enemy, new something or the other, and decides to post about it, but doesn't show any images, any sounds, anything copyrighted, and stuff.

In otherwords, what if they just talk about what they discovered as opposed to breaking the rules and linking to it and showing pictures of unfinished content?

[Tracer]

DoomzRules said:

So what about if someone finds something in the code that we haven't heard of yet like a new gameplay feature, new enemy, new something or the other, and decides to post about it, but doesn't show any images, any sounds, anything copyrighted, and stuff.

In otherwords, what if they just talk about what they discovered as opposed to breaking the rules and linking to it and showing pictures of unfinished content?

I think that'd be sharing intellectual property without consent still. I doubt that'd be okay.

[DoomzRules]

TraceOfSpades said:

I think that'd be sharing intellectual property without consent still. I doubt that'd be okay.

Yeah that's true, but what if they just talk a little bit about it? Like not really going into TOO MUCH detail.

[Quasar]

TraceOfSpades said:

I think that'd be sharing intellectual property without consent still. I doubt that'd be okay.

I don't think copyright law works that way. You may have accepted a EULA saying you wouldn't look inside the EXE (it could, as a horrible legal stretch, fall under the realm of "reverse engineering"), but that's a contractual agreement between you and Bethesda. Not a matter of law. If you look in there, see something interesting, and tell somebody about it, in your own words, that's not making a copy of something.

You guys are really doing the regime its own work for it these days, having this ever-more-expanding idea of things you're not legally allowed to do. It'll come in handy when they get around to actually lobbying for laws that say such things - all the same people will be chiming up claiming "nothing is really changing" based on their misinformed beliefs from the past.

[Tracer]

Quasar said:

I don't think copyright law works that way. You may have accepted a EULA saying you wouldn't look inside the EXE (it could, as a horrible legal stretch, fall under the realm of "reverse engineering"), but that's a contractual agreement between you and Bethesda. Not a matter of law. If you look in there, see something interesting, and tell somebody about it, in your own words, that's not making a copy of something.

You guys are really doing the regime its own work for it these days, having this ever-more-expanding idea of things you're not legally allowed to do. It'll come in handy when they get around to actually lobbying for laws that say such things - all the same people will be chiming up claiming "nothing is really changing" based on their misinformed beliefs from the past.

But they might be liable for invasion of privacy, but that's a civil law, not a criminal one. At best, depending on the legality of the contract, might give them standing to sue.

But I highly doubt they'll go that far.

[Linguica]

TraceOfSpades said:

But they might be liable for invasion of privacy, which is a suable act.

No.

[Tracer]

Linguica said:

No.

EDIT: More suited for a private discussion.

[Xaser]

I don't get it this time. The alpha had an NDA but I'm not aware of any such thing existing for the beta*. Or is it a copyright concern regarding the content? Otherwise this reads like an arbitrary spoiler-aversion.

(*Though I suppose it's totally plausible such a thing exists in the terms and conditions somewhere, since nobody reads those. :P )

[Doomayonise]

Rip datamine post.