surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Well, they can do that. It's false advertisement. EA should've went the THQ route and gave them a free game, like Bulletstorm or Shadows of the Damned.
I normally despise lawsuits, but EA lied through their teeth. I mean come on. What kind of real revenue do they still expect from 1943? Just give it away and do the right thing EA. Then again, this is EA. What are the chances of that?
"instead offering angry PS3 users the chance to purchase DLC a week earlier by way of a ludicrous apology -- despite the fact early DLC was already announced."
This statement is somewhat misleading since the majority of BF3 owners have this DLC included in their copy of the game.
But this is absolute douche-baggery on EA's part.
This statement is somewhat misleading since the majority of BF3 owners have this DLC included in their copy of the game.
But this is absolute douche-baggery on EA's part.
I was going to say "Queue the comments that don't get the issue and just poke fun at lawsuits and needless complaining".
Fact is that lawsuits are needed to establish what corporations can or cannot do. If you don't agree with that, that is your (and your internet petitions) right.
The tired of the old "Don't like it, don't buy it" comments. It's just not a realisticly valid argument when it comes to sleazy bussiness practices like this.
Looks like this turned into a bit of a rant.. sorry :)
Fact is that lawsuits are needed to establish what corporations can or cannot do. If you don't agree with that, that is your (and your internet petitions) right.
The tired of the old "Don't like it, don't buy it" comments. It's just not a realisticly valid argument when it comes to sleazy bussiness practices like this.
Looks like this turned into a bit of a rant.. sorry :)
I'm really enjoying BF3.
I got it on Xbox.
I already have BF 1943 on PS3.
I dislike the lawsuit culture there is in the US, which is also now quite quickly infecting the UK....
I'm still in support of this lawsuit. Totally. You cannot promise one thing in your advertising, and then just take it away. False advertising is a serious dick move and as you so eloquently put it Jimothy, they need a punch in the balls for it.
I got it on Xbox.
I already have BF 1943 on PS3.
I dislike the lawsuit culture there is in the US, which is also now quite quickly infecting the UK....
I'm still in support of this lawsuit. Totally. You cannot promise one thing in your advertising, and then just take it away. False advertising is a serious dick move and as you so eloquently put it Jimothy, they need a punch in the balls for it.
How can people be surprised? EA is FAR past caring about the consumer. We're just lemmings to them. They and Activision and...and I cannot believe I am saying this but Capcom...FUCKING CAPCOM...have been, will be and continue to pull shit like this not even caring it they'll get away with anymore. Just do it and fuck the consequences or outrage from the little people.
I'm glad someone out there has the balls, the will and the money to take EA to court over this. Sleazy bastards.
"Also, if they're Battlefield fans, why didn't they already have 1943?" This just might be the stupidest comment I've read on this site yet...Yes, stupider than anything Jimmyx has had to offer.
Sweet. They better be ordered to reimburse each and every customer for their slimy lies. I'm tired of these behemoth corporations getting away with nonsense like this.
I don't think they lied. I think they intended to do it, or at least someone at EA wanted to do it, then something happened and they ran out of time, or a mistake was made with what got pressed to disc, miscommunication occurred, or someone else in another position decided that it wasn't feasible. And I can understand that. Features discussed at a trade show on an unreleased product often never see the light of day.
However, the way they handled it was arrogant and insulting. Don't give a non-apology and offer something that was already out there. Don't be condescending to your customers about a mistake that you made. You don't give LESS when you screw up, you give MORE THAN OR EQUAL TO. Not everyone is happy with the THQ deal, but I think most people are content with how they handled it.
There is no way they lied to mislead customers into buying, that doesn't even make sense, and opens them up to litigation and at the very least results in a PR black-eye. But they could have done a hell of a lot more to make it up to those expecting the announced bonus, and a hell of a lot more to smooth over any bad feelings by offering a sincere apology and a real explanation.
However, the way they handled it was arrogant and insulting. Don't give a non-apology and offer something that was already out there. Don't be condescending to your customers about a mistake that you made. You don't give LESS when you screw up, you give MORE THAN OR EQUAL TO. Not everyone is happy with the THQ deal, but I think most people are content with how they handled it.
There is no way they lied to mislead customers into buying, that doesn't even make sense, and opens them up to litigation and at the very least results in a PR black-eye. But they could have done a hell of a lot more to make it up to those expecting the announced bonus, and a hell of a lot more to smooth over any bad feelings by offering a sincere apology and a real explanation.
Wow, what assholes. "Hey, just kidding about that free copy of our old game! How about instead we'll let you give us money a week sooner for some DLC?" The lawsuit may be a bit much, but an internet shit-storm is completely justifiable.
There dosen't seem to be a reason to comment here, as anything and everything good has already been said.
So I will offer moral support from the side lines. Go, lawsuit force!
@chocolate yeah, I live in America and I dislike the legal crap going on daily here too.
So I will offer moral support from the side lines. Go, lawsuit force!
@chocolate yeah, I live in America and I dislike the legal crap going on daily here too.
I linked them a comment showing that I was only going to buy BF3 if BF1943 was included that I made a few months ago, and linked them what they said about including the game, and they never got back to me. I'm glad someone decided to go this route, nd if it was a class action I would join up as well. If anybody knows who is doing this, if there is a place I can donate to legal expenses, let me know.
@Spaz - Considering they are letting people download SR2 for free, I'd say they actually handled the situation, unlike EA's response of not-apologizing and repurposing an already existing DLC schedule.
THQ's deal is so good, it it tempting me to buy, and I was going to wait until a Steam sale.
THQ's deal is so good, it it tempting me to buy, and I was going to wait until a Steam sale.
Shame this is a class action as those are completely worthless clusterfucks (we've had this conversation here on dtoid before) but I'm glad to see someone doing something about it, at least.
You can't decry the lawsuit culture, then turn around and agree with with a recently filed suit. Either we have a society where all litigation is given due process regardless of merit, or one where you agree to give up the right to file a claim for personal reasons.
I don't know if they deserve a class action lawsuit over this but they definitely deserve some sort of slap from the Federal Trade Commission or someone like the Better Business Bureau due to the false advertising.
I think Ubisoft deserves to get in trouble for the way claim that they wont have their massively invasive DRM in pc ports of their game and they usually end being in them anyways. These are legit selling points that both companies are reneging and that cant be legal.
I think Ubisoft deserves to get in trouble for the way claim that they wont have their massively invasive DRM in pc ports of their game and they usually end being in them anyways. These are legit selling points that both companies are reneging and that cant be legal.
I'm torn. EA deserves the cock-punch for sure. I'm flabbergasted that so many people would be so unbelievably butt-hurt over lack of an old game not being provided with a new game. False advertising aside, it's insulting that somebody would buy a brand new game for a copy of a game that's been out for years now. Ultimately, whichever side of the argument you're on, EA won't learn a lesson and will continue to be a bunch of money hungry, greedy mongrels.
Even thou the motive is not a big deal to make a lawsuit over, it's good for people doing this, especially with EA and it's horrid administrations this year
@amtalx: So I can't be against wasteful lawsuits but support the ones I feel have merit?
The "lawsuit culture", as in suing McDonald's over being burned by hot coffee, waters down valid lawsuits and other litigation, wastes money and can give people the idea that they don't need to be responsible, reasonable and use common sense.
This lawsuit is, in essence, about a company not fulfilling on a verbal contract. Not about some dumbass who cut off his hand with a table-saw and sues because the blade was sharp.
That's like saying I can't say our Legislative process is bullshit yet support Congress when they do something good. It's not a black and white area.
The "lawsuit culture", as in suing McDonald's over being burned by hot coffee, waters down valid lawsuits and other litigation, wastes money and can give people the idea that they don't need to be responsible, reasonable and use common sense.
This lawsuit is, in essence, about a company not fulfilling on a verbal contract. Not about some dumbass who cut off his hand with a table-saw and sues because the blade was sharp.
That's like saying I can't say our Legislative process is bullshit yet support Congress when they do something good. It's not a black and white area.
Huehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehuehue
Fuck you, Electronic AIDs.
Fuck you, Electronic AIDs.
Good for them. Like you said devs and publishers need to be held accountable for all their bullshit.
They also should be sued for handing out nonfunctional online passes and having a crappy support... Spent the entire afternoon yesterday trying to make the online pass of my cousin to work, still waiting for a response from EA.
@tristrix
A class action is really the only way this could have gone down, and is easily the best option. A court would have a hard time allowing single personal claims against EA to go through for something as small as this, as it would open the door for potentially hundreds of thousands of individual lawsuits to flood courts across the country with essentially $10 claims. Class actions exist to avoid that kind of clusterfuck.
@pokota
The lie was of omission. I remember when the original article came out showing the Twitter announcement, I said that the language they used could come back to haunt them, and I wouldn't be surprised now if it did. Whether or not they ever really intended to give the game away, they knew more than a month in advance that they couldn't, as per their Twitter announcement, and didn't say anything. If they, at any point, had made it clear that this promotion was no longer in effect, we would not be here talking about this right now. This is what holds them culpable, their inaction.
If, and when, this is granted class action status, don't expect it to ever see the inside of a courtroom. While stranger shit has happened (this is the American judicial system we're talking about here), EA stands almost no chance of winning. They would have to prove that consumers had a chance to find out that the promotion was no longer in effect before the game came out, and it seems like all they ever did was release a single Twitter statement.
A class action is really the only way this could have gone down, and is easily the best option. A court would have a hard time allowing single personal claims against EA to go through for something as small as this, as it would open the door for potentially hundreds of thousands of individual lawsuits to flood courts across the country with essentially $10 claims. Class actions exist to avoid that kind of clusterfuck.
@pokota
The lie was of omission. I remember when the original article came out showing the Twitter announcement, I said that the language they used could come back to haunt them, and I wouldn't be surprised now if it did. Whether or not they ever really intended to give the game away, they knew more than a month in advance that they couldn't, as per their Twitter announcement, and didn't say anything. If they, at any point, had made it clear that this promotion was no longer in effect, we would not be here talking about this right now. This is what holds them culpable, their inaction.
If, and when, this is granted class action status, don't expect it to ever see the inside of a courtroom. While stranger shit has happened (this is the American judicial system we're talking about here), EA stands almost no chance of winning. They would have to prove that consumers had a chance to find out that the promotion was no longer in effect before the game came out, and it seems like all they ever did was release a single Twitter statement.
By the way Jim, what did you think of the Saints Row: The Third PS3 make up in the form of a free download of Saints Row 2?
Oh you hypocrites. Remember when PS3 owners wanted to sue activision because they left out a feature in Black Ops and you all called them whiny bitches? Well, this is the same thing: a promise that that the PS3 version would be on par with the 360 version that was a major selling point and Actard didn't deliver.
That ain't right.
That ain't right.
Wow !
I just dont know what to say.
EA does this Shit again and again - Banning members from their forums as well as from PLAYING GAMES, lying through their teeth and then apologizing like it isnt a big deal.
I just dont know what to say.
EA does this Shit again and again - Banning members from their forums as well as from PLAYING GAMES, lying through their teeth and then apologizing like it isnt a big deal.
This suit is going to fail handily. Offhand comments from another company regarding your product features can in no way be considered advertising. Presumably, and precedent seems to hold, offhand comments from within your own company also cannot be considered advertising.
@OneRed
While I agree with you that this will likely never go to court, especially in light of the settlement terms, I'm not nearly as sure as you about the outcome. Did EA ever advertise a free copy of Battlefield 1943? And no, a pre-release press conference is not an official advertisement in the classic sense of the word. Would the court consider this a promotion, or simply a planned promotion which had been cancelled? Yes, that CAN be done, depending on the situation.
EA will have very, very good lawyers, and there are lots of things they can argue. Also, the burden is on the plaintiff, and the allegation that EA "could not, and never intended, to keep" the promotion isn't exactly easy to prove.
Don't forget that this is a Class Action, which lawyers will often take up knowing that they cannot win, simply because they expect to get a big payday by settling out of court. This kind of thing is a win-win for law firms. It all depends on precedent, and I don't know of any involving the exact same circumstances.
While I agree with you that this will likely never go to court, especially in light of the settlement terms, I'm not nearly as sure as you about the outcome. Did EA ever advertise a free copy of Battlefield 1943? And no, a pre-release press conference is not an official advertisement in the classic sense of the word. Would the court consider this a promotion, or simply a planned promotion which had been cancelled? Yes, that CAN be done, depending on the situation.
EA will have very, very good lawyers, and there are lots of things they can argue. Also, the burden is on the plaintiff, and the allegation that EA "could not, and never intended, to keep" the promotion isn't exactly easy to prove.
Don't forget that this is a Class Action, which lawyers will often take up knowing that they cannot win, simply because they expect to get a big payday by settling out of court. This kind of thing is a win-win for law firms. It all depends on precedent, and I don't know of any involving the exact same circumstances.
I'm sure most people can reach into a hat and find a reason to sue EA. Hope they learn a lesson from this, not just pay out a settlement to some guy and continue fucking around.
It's not just America that a lawsuit like this can exist. Canada, and most of the EU can do this. It's basic consumer protection.
By law in most countries, when you describe a product you sell, it has to fit that description. At which point, EA stated in the game description that the game comes with a certain feature, and then only stated that the feature isn't included AFTER the game was sold.
By law in most countries, when you describe a product you sell, it has to fit that description. At which point, EA stated in the game description that the game comes with a certain feature, and then only stated that the feature isn't included AFTER the game was sold.
@dtomek
It was officially announced at E3, by employees on official business at the world's largest gaming advertising event, and was not reneged. This can, in every conceivable way, be considered advertising. They weren't a couple of dudes around a water cooler, they were employees on official business, with the backing of their employers, announcing things in front of millions of people at gaming's largest advertising event. Where does the term "off hand" come into play exactly?
@LOLPARTY
If this suit is granted class action status (it will almost certainly be), and EA loses in court (they almost certainly will), just having proof that you purchased the game on the PS3 within a certain timeframe makes you "part" of the suit. Part of the suit, insofar as you will be able to receive compensation.
It was officially announced at E3, by employees on official business at the world's largest gaming advertising event, and was not reneged. This can, in every conceivable way, be considered advertising. They weren't a couple of dudes around a water cooler, they were employees on official business, with the backing of their employers, announcing things in front of millions of people at gaming's largest advertising event. Where does the term "off hand" come into play exactly?
@LOLPARTY
If this suit is granted class action status (it will almost certainly be), and EA loses in court (they almost certainly will), just having proof that you purchased the game on the PS3 within a certain timeframe makes you "part" of the suit. Part of the suit, insofar as you will be able to receive compensation.
Does this open the door for consumers to sue when game features are cut, or don't meet expectations?
follow
