jb1983 wrote...
Nykara wrote...
Stuff like this AT this point without giving bioware / EA a chance is only going to hurt any progress that might be made towards fixing things. Chances are it could all get caught up in red tape now.
This.
While the guy has a case, I think in the longrun it hurts everyone. Now Bioware (and other gaming companies) will have to be careful about what they say or promise. It could be they want to go in one direction, talk about it, and then change directions. A disgruntled fan could then file on them to the FTC. It just hurts the situation more than it helps at this moment.
Not quite. Have you read the EXTENSIVE discrepancies of what they compromised to deliver and what was delivered ABOUT THE ENDING?
http://social.biowar.../index/10056886
Notice that the case don't complain about the whole product, but only about the outcome. One parallel would be a spaghetti machine that mixes the ingredients right, but at the time to shape the pasta it makes a fusilli instead of the promissed spaghetti.
FTC will file that and demand that the last piece that is shaping the pasta to be replaced, and not order the recall of the WHOLE ingredient mixer altogether.
This case is the same. The last piece is making one otherwise fine device fail to deliver the intended outcome. That will not have that impact in the industry PER SE, but will have a HUGE IMPACT in advertising campaign.
Which is VERY VERY GOOD, since the whole problem is that Casey and Marc had this outcome all along and CHOSE to fool fans in thinking they were about to deliver something they NEVER intend to, just to boost pre-sales. If that NEVER, EVER happen again it will be too soon.
Let me trace a parallel on the other game I play: World of Warcraft. The developers there say they WANT to do a lot of things, they PLAN to deliver lots of stuff, then WAY BEFORE the date they set to have it ready, they inform us they scrapped all this stuff. You buy KNOWING it isn't there.
Bioware on the other hand, promised to deliver those stuff to the day they launched.We bought and still they didn't warned it was there. We found out it wasn't there, and all we receive is that "professional critics liked" and a trollface. When they HAD IT ALL ALONG it wasn't there to be delivered.
So, how can a company that anounces a plan, decide to not follow it, warn us about that BEFORE they launch the product can be affected by the precedent of punishment of a company that NEVER had the product they promised and still made their sales based on false advertising? The consequencas are WAY LESS dire than you people paint.
Modifié par Optimus J, 18 mars 2012 - 06:08 .





Retour en haut






