[Serious - TW: Sexual Assault] Conor McGregor (The Disruptor) verdict and presence in the game

[Urben]

@Dribbleondo

This isn’t…always online specific. Steam and other platforms are being criticised for this exact problem. Not sure of the connection there to be honest.

You are right it is not directly connected to always-online, I was more aiming for how Hitman is pretty far from “you buy it and you own it”, which would be even further away if they did that. But yes you can take away content without always online and just regular patches.

@Dribbleondo

And I think developers have the right to fix their own mistakes. Saying they can’t ever change anything or remove anything they sell after they release it is problematic for multiple reasons.

It is not like IO is an artist that made a sculpture in their own house and decided to dump it because it is ugly. This matter here includes players who paid for this and McGregor himself. Plus whatever agencies are involved in between, if any. It is not only IO having rights here.

They can change something, just not anything.

@Dribbleondo

If a controversial celebrity was removed from the game, then I think that’d come under extreme circumstances. This would not be the status quo. Anyone affected could’ve got the new DLC for free, but IO didn’t do that. Lord knows why.

Instead, the company went for the most…profitable…route, instead of addressing the controversy in a timely manner, which would’ve satisfied most (or all) parties involved.

Besides that you and me are just guessing here what is legally possible and what not, let me point out that what you demand here solely affects people who bought the original DLC. It does not affect anyone else as that DLC is delisted. Deleting it also does not undo that it happened nor that IO made money with it.

Kinda funny how nobody on HMF so far, as far I can remember, suggested that IO donated the money they earned with McGregor. I am sure there are enough institutions that can make use of that. That would be good for the image.

I also don’t see how this now is a profitable route here? Or do you mean they should have made this new DLC for free for everyone?

[djsojus]

@Urben

Kinda funny how nobody on HMF so far, as far I can remember, suggested that IO donated the money they earned with McGregor

Well… There were some ideas. And I would fully support something like this!

@Heisenberg

Better yet, charge a fee, and 100% of the earnings from it is donated to the victims - of McGregor at least, the others if there are ever guilty/liability verdicts.

@LocoGamingRocker

my idea was to have a reskin of 47’s Signature Suit with a pink tie, a pink Briefcase, some other pink colored items, and Safehouse cosmetics for Freelancer - and the donation to go to women’s shelters in general.

[Urben]

I stand corrected, thank you for pointing this out. A bit of faith restored here

[Dribbleondo]

@Urben

Kinda funny how nobody on HMF so far, as far I can remember, suggested that IO donated the money they earned with McGregor. I am sure there are enough institutions that can make use of that. That would be good for the image.

I did when I made my video on the subject. And I’m fairly sure I wasn’t the only one.

@Urben

I also don’t see how this now is a profitable route here?

What I mean here is that, instead of replacing the controversial DLC with another one to fix the problem at the time, they instead chose to wait out the storm, and went down the path that’d benefit them the most (I.E: make money from new DLC purchasers and people who had the disruptor, which is clearly the point of alienation). They re-released the mission with a new celebrity as a new DLC, which functionally exists alongside it, despite clearly being meant to replace it, and doesn’t really solve the problem. Conor is still in the game, it’s just hidden a lot better.

[Urben]

@Dribbleondo

I did when I made my video on the subject

Neat, I must confess I don’t always watch your vids to the fullest.

@Dribbleondo

they instead chose to wait out the storm, and went down the path that’d benefit them the most (I.E: make money from new DLC purchasers and people who had the disruptor, which is clearly the point of alienation). They re-released the mission with a new celebrity as a new DLC

So mostly like others me included see it, ideally this would have been done sooner and for free for those that owned the Disruptor. Though I guess it would have been cheaper and thus maybe more profitable to not pick a new celebrity here. Possibly this new guy is also partially the reason it took this long.

@Dribbleondo

Conor is still in the game, it’s just hidden a lot better.

Yes, like I said, might have not been possible to remove him entirely legally. Though I think there is the concept of “hidden well enough”.

[Palgato]

Accusations against McGregor were made public in 2019 so ioi knowingly worked with someone who was in the middle of the court process due to rape.

[thrison]

They also thought it would be a great idea to reactivate the CelebrET at the same time the trial for said rape was actually in court.

[Palgato]

And also Van Damme is a fan of Putin and Vegas has an interesting following list on Instagram.

They sure know who to work with.

[Heisenberg]

Or it could just be that a lot of celebrities whose personas are built up as tough guys or wild boys - let’s face it, it’s not exclusively a men thing, but it’s mostly a men thing - have that kind of history and so the law of averages is that choosing to be involved with a celebrity of any sort carries with it a high probability of them being shit in some fashion.

[Erigu]

Sure, there is that (and that’s part of the reason why I’m not a huge fan of the concept of celebrity cameos, but I guess money talked and that ship has long sailed), but again, it’s not like they turned out to be shitheels after the fact, here.

[Tetrafish_21]

Re: “I bought the Disruptor Pack, so I should get The Wizard Pack for free or a discount.”

We can assume that IOI had a contractual obligation with McGregor. However it was worked out, we can also assume that McGregor was monetarily compensated. Whether that was an upfront sum, or maybe residuals from sales… or (who knows?). Since, I believe, he’s pretty much retired from MMA due to his broken leg or ankle, this was a way for him to make a pittance on the side (to pad the millions he already has).

Then a spotlight is shown on his deeds. IOI then breaks ties with McGregor. If he was promised so much $$, I’d imagine IOI might still have to pay something to him, regardless of the amount of “promised” sales from the DLC, and take the hit. Again, I’m only guessing/assuming here. HE could’ve also received an upfront sum and been done with it, leaving IOI to make back what they paid him.

So whoever paid $ for the DLC, part of it would have to have gone into McGregor’s pocket.

–

Enter, The Wizard.

Another contract for DLC sales is signed, as well as other stuff, but since anyone would dare think they’re entitled to this (mostly) new content…

Imagine you’re IOI. You tell Khalifa: “Well, sir. As you can see the sales for the McGregor DLC were $8,025.00. Since everyone that bought the McGregor packs are entitled to content we’re making with you, you will not see a profit until sales surpass $8,025.00.”

Now imagine you’re this Khalifa guy… and not laughing as you throw up your hands and walk out of the office as the small shredded squares of the contract you ripped up with IOI float and flutter to the thin office carpet.

You can’t do it, can you?

[thrison]

Well, they could’ve set it up so that if a players owns both The Disruptor DLC and The Wizard DLC, they get a discount on The World Champions Pack to get around that problem if they really wanted to look after their playerbase in some way while still securing the new celebrity.

[silvereaper]

Follow this guide

[Bardachenko]

I was thinking of a way to bring back The Disruptor without running into legal issues with McGregor. Maybe IOI’s problem is that they can’t bring back the mission without him, but with a generic NPC. With The Wizard, they’ve now modified the mission. They could use the new version to replace the target with a generic MMA-themed Irish NPC. Bringing back the items that were locked with The Disruptor. That way, they wouldn’t be bringing back McGregor’s mission—which could cause legal problems—but Khalifa’s instead. McGregor wouldn’t have any claim, and Hitman fans could get the pack with the locked items. I hope this could be possible!

[Palgato]

Or they can also just dump the 2 Disruptor suits into a random low effort challenge pack and it would be fine.

[Gontranno47]

I…have questions, but this is clearly a sensitive topic and I’m worried if I use just one wrong word, I’m going to have five angry replies quoting it. I too hadn’t heard of ‘SA’ as an acronym and I’m not on social media (where I assume such terms are coined), so my odds aren’t great to begin with.

So here goes…

My understanding of the situation is IO signed the elusive target deal ‘The Disruptor’ with a celebrity called McGregor. McGregor was at the time involved in a court case involving sexual assault - but at the time of the deal was innocent until proven guilty. The Disruptor launches and McGregor is later found guilty.

IO responds by making The Disruptor unavailable, but retains it in the game menu to this day. They don’t remove it, but they also don’t fully keep it?
In fact, now that a re-worked ET has been launched with a different celebrity (The Wizard), The Disruptor is still featured?

Has there ever been an official statement on the status of the mission? Surely a contractual obligation cannot still persist for a limited time promotion that ended more than a year ago.

[jan342]

I don’t think the issue is with the contract between IOI and Connor McGregor. But some people bought the The Disruptor DLC back when it was available, that granted them permanent access to the respective Arcade mission. Taking that away would be screwing over those customers.

[chuckmcgillgaming]

It’s cause we paid for it. It doesnt exist in the arcade menu for people who dont have the pack, but you cant fully remove stuff that was created that players got stuff from and paid for

[Happy_Squirrel]

@Gontranno47

Surely a contractual obligation cannot still persist for a limited time promotion that ended more than a year ago.

I very much doubt IO are contractually obligated to keep McGregor’s likeness in their game. Rather, I believe it’s that to fully remove the Disruptor (i.e. take it away from those who purchased access), IO would need to fully refund all those customers.

A portion of the sales presumably went to McGregor, so they would not able to recoup the costs without a lengthy legal dispute. And, in any case, McGregor would likely win because his lawyers would argue IO knew the risk of his ongoing case when they partnered with him.

Or, McGregor may have just been paid a flat appearance fee and IO themselves profited entirely from the sales after that.

Whichever way the deal was done, clearly IO do not want to swallow the cost of refunding all buyers of the Disruptor pack.

[Gontranno47]

So the mission is currently still playable in the Arcade to those who bought at the time?

@chuckmcgillgaming

you cant fully remove stuff that was created that players got stuff from and paid for

@Happy_Squirrel

clearly IO do not want to swallow the cost of refunding all buyers of the Disruptor pack.

So the cost of removal is higher than the PR cost of keeping it there…

If I were in IO’s shoes, I’d merged the ID codes of the two missions so digitally they’re the same one. The original The Disruptor is converted into The Wizard, and people who bought the original don’t get charged twice. All new players who want to experience The Disruptor and its unlocks without supporting McGregor’s fame, they can buy The Wizard

If that’s not technologically or legally feasible, then just find the accounts that had The Disruptor on it, and give them The Wizard for free