Elden Ring Player's Lawsuit: A "Skill Issue" or Misleading Marketing?
An Elden Ring player, Nora Kisaragi, has filed a lawsuit against Bandai Namco and FromSoftware in Massachusetts small claims court. The claim alleges that the developers misled consumers by concealing substantial game content, hidden behind the games' notoriously high difficulty.
Kisaragi's 4Chan post announcing the lawsuit claims FromSoftware games contain a "whole new game… hidden inside," intentionally obscured by challenging gameplay. While FromSoftware games are known for their difficulty, Kisaragi argues this difficulty masks the existence of undiscovered content. They cite datamined content as evidence, contrasting with the common interpretation that this is merely leftover development material. Kisaragi insists this content is intentionally hidden, supported only by what they call "constant hints" from developers, such as references in art books and developer statements.
The core of the lawsuit is the assertion that players paid for inaccessible content without knowledge of its existence. However, many dismiss the claim as absurd, noting that extensive datamining would likely have uncovered such hidden content. The presence of cut content in game code is common industry practice, not evidence of deliberate concealment.
The lawsuit's legal viability is questionable. While Massachusetts small claims court allows individuals 18 and older to sue without legal representation, the case hinges on proving "unfair or deceptive practices" under Consumer Protection Law. Kisaragi faces the significant challenge of providing substantial evidence for a "hidden dimension" and demonstrating consumer harm. Without concrete proof, dismissal is highly likely. Even if successful, damages in small claims court are limited.
Despite the long odds, Kisaragi's stated goal transcends legal victory. They aim to force Bandai Namco to publicly acknowledge the existence of this alleged hidden dimension, regardless of the lawsuit's outcome.
The case highlights the blurry line between challenging gameplay and potentially misleading marketing, though the plaintiff's lack of evidence makes a successful outcome highly improbable.
