86 réponses à ce sujet

[lv12medic]

Well, I'll still buy Bioware and EA games if I wish too. However, if that was really the reason for the suspension of that person's account, then there should be a way to challenge such an action. If there isn't then that is a serious problem on EA's end. At least if you get forum banned, there's ways to make a new account and PM a moderator or something. But banning your legally purchased "license" without adequate ability to challenge said action is un-ethical in my opinion.

[DinoCrisisFan]

It's 1984!

[Feverus]

Yep. The issue here is that he paid hundreds of dollars for access to his games. If EA feels they have the right to cut access to your games on their whim - not their multiplayer service, but the games you gave them money to play on your own PC - this needs to be publicized everywhere.

Modifié par Feverus, 11 mars 2011 - 04:19 .

[KenKenpachi]

Give me a sec was a **** storm on a game site over it....god what was that site called starts with a T japanese sounding, also the bans I can pull those up on a number of fan sites, modders in praticular are pissed about it as the rules prevent them from doing much of anything. I'll edit my post, with the information, if anyone knows what the game site I forgot is, chime in.

Here's one report that throws modders in the same grouping as hackers, and sources say they still are banning like this, trying to dig up other reports as well http://www.joystiq.c...aft-2-cheaters/

The TOS for SC2 holds you to account for ANY changes to the game as breaking the TOS, no modding for you!

Banning for bad playmenship http://gamrfeed.vgch...ii-thats-a-ban/


And the price to re-activate is $60- USD on the offical site, for a new CD key to be sent out. Still can't find the report I'm looking for however. Shame I can't it went into detail on the bans on critics and mappers. As well as they whole, oh for a new CD key we'll let you come back.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 11 mars 2011 - 04:30 .

[Keele]

Feverus wrote...

For the posters supporting EA/Bioware, do you think the onus is on a gamer to assume an AAA game company will ban him from playing a single-player game for the kind of relatively inoffensive criticism in this example?

If not, do you believe every gamer needs to read through the EULA for every game they buy to ensure this doesn't happen?  If you had to do so, you wouldn't buy as many games.  In fact, sales would crash, and that's not in the interests of EA or any other game company.  Frankly, hiding terms like that in the EULA is a swindle.  

I will say it loud and proud: Bioware has sold their soul to EA and is swindling their consumers.  If you buy their games, after this point, you deserve whatever they do to you. 

An ignorant accusation is NOT ''inoffensive criticism''.

It is, indeed, the responsibility of said gamer to read, acknowledge and follow 'the rules'.

If a gamer agrees to the EULA, yet fails to meet the agreement that he/she made, then he/she is wholly responsible for his/her consequence.

Modifié par Keele, 11 mars 2011 - 04:26 .

[R3miel]

I was going to preorder The Old Republic but between the public relations fiasco and DA:2 not being anywhere close to as what DA:O was, I'm gonna hold back and see what happens.

[KenKenpachi]

R3miel wrote...

I was going to preorder The Old Republic but between the public relations fiasco and DA:2 not being anywhere close to as what DA:O was, I'm gonna hold back and see what happens.

I really don't see the big deal, they are people they have feelings too. That guy played with fire and he got burned for it, as he should.

If you spit in a soldiers face don't be surprised if he shoots you. If you insult a mans kid, don't be surprised if he hits you. Every time I hear Public relations I hear, loud mouth ass hats that we can't hit. Well shouldn't hit.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 11 mars 2011 - 04:33 .

[Keele]

R3miel wrote...

I was going to preorder The Old Republic but between the public relations fiasco and DA:2 not being anywhere close to as what DA:O was, I'm gonna hold back and see what happens.

Are you going to behave like an ****? No? Then you have nothing to worry about.

[Noilly Prat]

KenKenpachi wrote...


If you spit in a soldiers face don't be surprised if he shoots you. If you insult a mans kid, don't be surprised if he hits you. Every time I hear Public relations I hear, loud mouth ass hats that we can't hit. Well shouldn't hit.

Perhaps those reactions shouldn't be surprising, exactly, but that doesn't mean that they aren't wholly inappropriate, or that the soldier or father in question shouldn't be arrested and prosecuted for reacting in that way.

I don't really know the details of this whole situation, but if it's true that somebody has been unable to play a game they have paid for due to a community ban on the BioWare Social Network-- deserved or not-- then I don't believe that this is reasonable or appropriate as a form of punishment.  It may be in the EULA, but it shouldn't be, in my opinion.  I don't think it has any place there, personally.

This is obviously just an opinion, and obviously mine isn't the opinion that matters here, but I don't think that a person's conduct on an online social network should affect their ability to play a game that they have paid for unless the social network is a fully integrated part of the game, or vice versa.  And I don't buy that this is the case here.

Modifié par Noilly Prat, 11 mars 2011 - 04:48 .

[Godak]

Is it still possible to play the game offline?

[KenKenpachi]

Noilly Prat wrote...

KenKenpachi wrote...


If you spit in a soldiers face don't be surprised if he shoots you. If you insult a mans kid, don't be surprised if he hits you. Every time I hear Public relations I hear, loud mouth ass hats that we can't hit. Well shouldn't hit.

Perhaps those reactions shouldn't be surprising, exactly, but that doesn't mean that they aren't wholly inappropriate, or that the soldier or father in question shouldn't be arrested and prosecuted for reacting in that way.

I don't really know the details of this whole situation, but if it's true that somebody has been unable to play a game they have paid for due to a community ban on the BioWare Social Network-- deserved or not-- then I don't believe that this is reasonable or appropriate as a form of punishment.  It may be in the EULA, but it shouldn't be, in my opinion.  I don't think it has any place there, personally.

This is obviously just an opinion, and obviously mine isn't the opinion that matters here, but I don't think that a person's conduct on an online social network should affect their ability to play a game that they have paid for unless the social network is a fully integrated part of the game, or vice versa.  And I don't buy that this is the case here.

That first part is a manner of opinion but politcally on the Politial compass I'm well up on the ladder in authoritarian marks, and have a general low opinion of most laws. But moving on South Korea would Dissagree with you. And honestly if we did what they did, 4chan and V would be gone, as would %90 of trolls.

http://en.wikipedia....stration_number

Given a suicide from a network bulling attack the internet IS serrious Business. And in fact most South Korean Laws apply to its people while on line.  And ID theaft there has a 3 year prison run in and a 10,000,000 W fee. Or nearly 9000 bucks (USD). Some people will only be good if a fear of punishment is above them that can enforce it, or so it seems to me. And if you remove any sort of protection for them to hide under that leaves them open to assault from vigilanty action. Put a glass wall between two men and one will make fun of the other as he's "protected", remove the wall and allow the natural order to fallow, and gee you'll notice the same man won't do anything but go on down the street.

Speaking of the Korea's I just found it odd that NK's Currency is worth more than SK's...oh well later.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 11 mars 2011 - 05:04 .

[DJDanger]

The number of people backing up EA/Bioware is astounding. Do you really think that a company should be able to revoke your right to play games that you paid for because you said something they disagreed with? Why does one's conduct on the forums have any bearing on their right to play a single player game? Perhaps if it was a ban from multiplayer, EA might have some small justification. As for the "You should have read the EULA, you deserve getting taken advantage of," do you honestly believe that the consumer should be obligated to suffer through pages of obtuse legalese for every game that they've already paid for? Besides, even if you find something objectionable,there's not much you can do. You've already paid for the game, and good luck trying to return an open PC game to a retailer, especially if you're complaint is that, "I read the EULA and I didn't like it, can I have my money back?" I'm sure they'll be happy to show you the door.

Point is, tolerating this will only lead to EA and other companies continuing to take advantage of consumers to squeeze as much profit as they can. I, for one, like being treated like a valuable customer, and if EA doesn't offer that then I'll take my business elsewhere.

End of line

[Feverus]

Keele wrote...

R3miel wrote...

I was going to preorder The Old Republic but between the public relations fiasco and DA:2 not being anywhere close to as what DA:O was, I'm gonna hold back and see what happens.

Are you going to behave like an ****? No? Then you have nothing to worry about.

I am not afraid of EA or Bioware.  I find their behavior offensive and I think they are stealing from customers.  

[TheNerevarine]

DJDanger wrote...

The number of people backing up EA/Bioware is astounding

No, KenKenpachi and Keele are the only shills in this thread defending the ban. Their reasons are as irrelevant as they are confounding. My best guess is that they're afraid of getting their game licenses revoked should they speak out of line, and for obvious reasons.

Fortunately, there is solidarity for outraged gamers on reddit.com, where this story has hit the front page and the response is generally unanimous.

Modifié par TheNerevarine, 11 mars 2011 - 06:30 .

[Keele]

TheNerevarine wrote...

DJDanger wrote...

The number of people backing up EA/Bioware is astounding

My best guess is that they're afraid of getting their game licenses revoked should they speak out of line, and for obvious reasons.

Or maybe I just don't agree with you.

Impossible, right?

Modifié par Keele, 11 mars 2011 - 07:25 .

[daponz]

Anyhow, the fact that a company can decide that one can not use the service the customer has acquired through legal ways is not legal. The fact that the game was legally bought in a store using legal tender has to ensure the customer the right to use this service. He has not broken any federal, state or county laws, nor did the customer engage in criminal enterprise in which he used the said service. Thus no clear legal reason can be found to disrupt the service for this customer.
I don't know the American lawsystem enough, but in Europe this could get ugly in courts.

[Juqu]

Screencapture of the original tread is on the Reddit's frondpage.
Nice pr.

[DukeOfNukes]

Keele wrote...

If a gamer agrees to the EULA, yet fails to meet the agreement that he/she made, then he/she is wholly responsible for his/her consequence.

The law has proven time and time again that contracts are by no means binding. If you can make a case that certain conditions were burried in a wall of irrelevant text, and that they are ridiculous conditions, then you can get out of said contract.

This wouldn't be an issue to begin with if DA didn't FORCE you to play online. It's a single player game, and yet they can deny you access to your save files at any point they choose?

Just another thing that you will NEVER see in other mediums. Imagine movies that wont play in your blu-ray player because you said something nasty about Disney. I just have this image of people selling art, going out and buying a reproduction of a Monet, and it coming in an unremovable frame. The frame is open most of the time, but has a shutter that can block out the art, just in case you say something negative about the Tate Museum of Modern Art.

This is the same thing...denying access to something people have already paid for, because the company has decided they aren't worthy.

I'm not saying that I hate Bioware, or that I wont be buying any more...but this is a problem that needs to be remedied.

[Shike]

 I fail to see how an EULA can be binding if you're not given a copy at time of purchase or with a clear cut path for refund at purchase price.  If I open the software all returns are not accepted regardless of whether you accept the EULA -- I'm betting EA won't refund you for your trouble, but by all means try.
The EULA is a contractual nightmare to enforce, and it's noted time and time again with mixed levels of enforcement.  
What we really have here though is a case of bad permission management.  Administration shouldn't be able to ban people from forums and games - they are mutually exclusive entities.  It's just begging for the system to be abused and punish legitimate customers.  The forum management should be locked to a level where they can only ban forum activity, nothing more.
Oh, it's worth noting that I did cancel all EA and Bioware related preorders I own.  I plan on purchasing nothing from these companies anymore until this issue is fixed (and even then I'm hesitant).  I'm perfectly happy supporting competition like Bethesda and Valve (just one of the names where this companies lost revenue is now going).  I won't even pirate your games, because in the grand scheme of things there's already more good games out there then anyone could possibly have the time to play through (even without your catalog, shocking eh?).  One persons money spent over a few games isn't a lot, but judging by the publicity this is creating Bioware/EA has shot themselves in the proverbial foot.  Money lost is money lost, and for a stupid reason.

[DND_Enkil]

This is beyond what is acceptable for me, if i buy a car, is unhappy with it and complain that does not give the retailer the right to take it back without any refund.

Banning from multiplayer/forums is fine, being unable to play a singleplayer product because of a ban based on critisism (warranted or not) is just not okay. Until they revoke this policy i will not be bying any more EA games, PC Xbox or PS3. Just like i would not buy a car from a cardealer having the same policy.

[Shike]

Sorry, seems first post did go through (wasn't showing)

Modifié par Shike, 11 mars 2011 - 08:28 .

[Feverus]

KenKenpachi wrote...

R3miel wrote...

I was going to preorder The Old Republic but between the public relations fiasco and DA:2 not being anywhere close to as what DA:O was, I'm gonna hold back and see what happens.

I really don't see the big deal, they are people they have feelings too. That guy played with fire and he got burned for it, as he should.

If you spit in a soldiers face don't be surprised if he shoots you. If you insult a mans kid, don't be surprised if he hits you. Every time I hear Public relations I hear, loud mouth ass hats that we can't hit. Well shouldn't hit.

Authority means responsibility, and part of that for a good citizen and a reliable member of society is self-control.  That means turning the other cheek when you are spit at; it means when one of your soldiers shoots a citizen for offending them you execute the soldier.  If someone insults you, be a man and shrug it off!  To respond with physical violence is the measure of a brute who does not care about his family, his friends, or the consequences his actions have to those around him.  

Everyone has feelings.  Everyone has their feelings hurt regularly.  It is how you respond that is your measure of value.

[Eruonen]

Very classy, EA.

Modifié par Eruonen, 11 mars 2011 - 08:55 .

[FantasticPlastic]

I strongly agree with OP on this.

You must fix this stupidity, just stop with the DRM and "purchasing a limited install, revokable license to use for the purpose of play" rudeness.

Its insulting and backwards.

If i paid for the game, its mine forever, no exceptions, no max 3 installations, no shenannigans.

Removing access to content that has been paid for, especially for posting opinions, is totally off base and MUST be stopped.

Should EA continue with this path they will be inciting piracy and backlash from those who would do such things when faced with a company that has forgotten its place in the consumption cycle.

Modifié par FantasticPlastic, 11 mars 2011 - 09:11 .