Technically, yes. Feasibly, no.
Your best bet is just not to trust anything in trailers or interviews, since PR departments, developers, and marketers can and will lie through their teeth. It's why things like Twitter answers are often so evasive as to be useless.
People can attempt to sue anyone for any childish and retarded reason they choose. Doesn't mean anything will come of it other than the person being embarrassed.
This suggests that these foibles are completely without merit, which is wrong.
Yes the idea of suing Bioware, particularly the idea of this brought up by someone posting on the Bioware forum is a little silly but the concerns are still valid.
Also, do you not have more eloquent language than "retarded" to express your views?
You can, but since you're asking and not doing it I doubt you have the money to afford a lawyer that could actually make a case out of this. Even then you stand almost no chance against whatever bloodsuckers EA has on speed dial.
In reality you can sue anyone for absolutely anything
such as the woman suing Disney because their movie Frozen plagiarized her autobiography.
And if i remember right, someone tried to sue Bioware for ME3 and misrepresentation
Do i think you should? certainly not, i don't think Inquisition was wrongfully advertised, just some content was cut/reused somewhere else and its all up to personel opinion as to what a 'hard decision'.
And also... really? EA are going to be able to pay for muuuch better lawyer's than the majority of people, and can just file a counter-claim for wrongful accusations
This suggests that these foibles are completely without merit, which is wrong.
Yes the idea of suing Bioware, particularly the idea of this brought up by someone posting on the Bioware forum is a little silly but the concerns are still valid.
Also, do you not have more eloquent language than "retarded" to express your views?
I don't need more eloquent language. The selfish, spoiled, childish, and entitled attitude of suing a company because you didn't like the product it made is retarded. "This diet cookie says it tastes just as good as a regular cookie but it doesn't, I'm gonna sue!" "This board game claims to be fun for the whole family but it's only fun for the kids, time for a lawsuit!" It's a freaking video game people. It's not a crib that collapsed with your infant child in it and seriously injured them.
I don't need more eloquent language. The selfish, spoiled, childish, and entitled attitude of suing a company because you didn't like the product it made is retarded. "This diet cookie says it tastes just as good as a regular cookie but it doesn't, I'm gonna sue!" "This board game claims to be fun for the whole family but it's only fun for the kids, time for a lawsuit!" It's a freaking video game people. It's not a crib that collapsed with your infant child in it and seriously injured them.
If you'd bothered to read any of my comments you'd see that you're preaching to the choir.
I made it quite clear the idea of suing Bioware is ridiculous but if David Gaider has the time to come on to a forum and explain why he didn't put the warden in Dragon Age Inquisition (a feature that they never said would be in inquisition) because people are whinging about it then you'd think someone from Bioware would have time to come on to the forum and simply acknowledge content (that WAS stated as content within inquisition) that isn't there!
"Apologies guys, we dropped the ball on that one" That's all it would take for a bit of common courtesy.
I recommend a class action lawsuit regarding the massive amounts of rectal trauma.
So dozens of statements of a company saying the opposite about a product they sell is acceptable?
Childish is to not sue companies that lie to their costumers.
If a car is advetised with an air bag and it does not come with an air bag or the air bag is not exactly like they advertised than you could and should sue. Same goes for everything and every kind of product. If you can prove everything Bioware employees stated in posts, interviews and videos is true than ok, but if not, they are legally wrong and should pay for that. I'm not talking about what they show since "it is alpha, beta, whatever" but what they promised about the game.
If you'd bothered to read any of my comments you'd see that you're preaching to the choir.
I made it quite clear the idea of suing Bioware is ridiculous but if David Gaider has the time to come on to a forum and explain why he didn't put the warden in Dragon Age Inquisition (a feature that they never said would be in inquisition) because people are whinging about it then you'd think someone from Bioware would have time to come on to the forum and simply acknowledge content (that WAS stated as content within inquisition) that isn't there!
"Apologies guys, we dropped the ball on that one" That's all it would take for a bit of common courtesy.
Why would I bother to go back and read your comments? I responded to your quote of my post.
There's so much whining about so many things right now, they can't possibly respond to everything. There are some major bugs that need to be fixed before they can even think about changing anything else if they even would.
So dozens of statements of a company saying the opposite about a product they sell is acceptable?
Childish is to not sue companies that lie to their costumers.
If a car is advetised with an air bag and it does not come with an air bag or the air bag is not exactly like they advertised than you could and should sue. Same goes for everything and every kind of product. If you can prove everything Bioware employees stated in posts, interviews and videos is true than ok, but if not, they are legally wrong and should pay for that. I'm not talking about what they show since "it is alpha, beta, whatever" but what they promised about the game.
Yeah...except an airbag is something that could mean the difference between life and death. A video game? Ha! Besides, those statements were all subjective "it feels more like Origins, you'll like it" is different than "DA:I will be a first person shooter set during a ficticious WWIII."
I don't need more eloquent language. The selfish, spoiled, childish, and entitled attitude of suing a company because you didn't like the product it made is retarded. "This diet cookie says it tastes just as good as a regular cookie but it doesn't, I'm gonna sue!" "This board game claims to be fun for the whole family but it's only fun for the kids, time for a lawsuit!" It's a freaking video game people. It's not a crib that collapsed with your infant child in it and seriously injured them.
Lovely shaming tactics. Have anything else of "value" to add my dear ?
Bioware openly lied about the PC version of this game. A glance at the PC Community Concerns thread will show you that.
They could have been up front and said "Hey there, DAI is going to be focused on consoles and controllers."
They could have pulled a Rockstar and said "Hey there, we are delaying the PC version because it is not as good as we like it to be and we want more time because we want to make the gaming experience on PC as good as it can get"
But they didn't. They said things like "PC is our primary platform, it is very tactical, etc" and it is clearly not.
When people pay good money for a product and when the product was advertised to work in a certain way but it clearly does not, then the consumer has every right to be upset and pursue legal action. That is the basics on consumer rights.
It is because of consumers like you that we have developers and other companies just screwing people over and over again in their metaphorical arse.
Why would I bother to go back and read your comments? I responded to your quote of my post.
There's so much whining about so many things right now, they can't possibly respond to everything. There are some major bugs that need to be fixed before they can even think about changing anything else if they even would.
You're still missing my point! It's not about changing anything, or adding anything or doing anything to the game itself.
It's a great game.
The issue is the acknowledgement of content that was touted as included and then simply vanished, content that people were looking forward to.
This simple acknowledgement would cost nothing, it doesn't take long to simply say "we ****** up on that one, sorry"
If you'd bothered to read any of my comments you'd see that you're preaching to the choir.
I made it quite clear the idea of suing Bioware is ridiculous but if David Gaider has the time to come on to a forum and explain why he didn't put the warden in Dragon Age Inquisition (a feature that they never said would be in inquisition) because people are whinging about it then you'd think someone from Bioware would have time to come on to the forum and simply acknowledge content (that WAS stated as content within inquisition) that isn't there!
"Apologies guys, we dropped the ball on that one" That's all it would take for a bit of common courtesy.
I don't think Bioware has any form of common courtesy. I mean, the ME3 ending debacle showed that much.
It would be nice if they did have some form of common courtesy and apologized, but they don't and they won't.
Lovely shaming tactics. Have anything else of "value" to add my dear ?
Bioware openly lied about the PC version of this game. A glance at the PC Community Concerns thread will show you that.
They could have been up front and said "Hey there, DAI is going to be focused on consoles and controllers."
They could have pulled a Rockstar and said "Hey there, we are delaying the PC version because it is not as good as we like it to be and we want more time because we want to make the gaming experience on PC as good as it can get"
But they didn't. They said things like "PC is our primary platform, it is very tactical, etc" and it is clearly not.
When people pay good money for a product and when the product was advertised to work in a certain way but it clearly does not, then the consumer has every right to be upset and pursue legal action.
That's just laughable. 
Again those statements are subjective. I'm sure a lot of people think the game is very tactical. Do you also try to sue film companies that make movies you don't like? Twilight wasn't a romance for the ages at all! Call my lawyer!
You're still missing my point! It's not about changing anything, or adding anything or doing anything to the game itself.
It's a great game.
The issue is the acknowledgement of content that was touted as included and then simply vanished, content that people were looking forward to.
This simple acknowledgement would cost nothing, it doesn't take long to simply say "we ****** up on that one, sorry"
And they're supposed to acknowledge every single whining thread on the forums? (personally I'd rater they be fixing bugs than patting people on the head for every ****** and moan) Besides, even if they believe they did a bad job on the combat (and maybe they don't) why would they admit it so soon after the game's release? They're not going to hurt their own sales.
DAI was clearly falsely advertised.
1 - Back to Origins
2 - PC lead platform
3 - Old tactical camera back
4 - Listening to the community
None of that was part of the advertising or marketing of the game
Neither BioWare nor EA are responsible for your assumptions and desires
And they're supposed to acknowledge every single whining thread on the forums? (personally I'd rater they be fixing bugs than patting people on the head for every ****** and moan) Besides, even if they believe they did a bad job on the combat (and maybe they don't) why would they admit it so soon after the game's release? They're not going to hurt their own sales.
My main point is not a subjective one, the content I'm talking about isn't bad, it's just non-existent. One of the main points they fussed and fawned over in presentations was customizable keeps. I use this example because it's not open to opinion (something like the combat you can love it or hate it, i quite like it but others don't) It's just NOT THERE.
That to me just seems pretty bad form.
This one point may seem petty on it's own but it opens the floodgates for the tons of other options that people feel "lied to" over.
I say again, it's the principle of the thing.
My main point is not a subjective one, the content I'm talking about isn't bad, it's just non-existent. One of the main points they fussed and fawned over in presentations was customizable keeps. I use this example because it's not open to opinion (something like the combat you can love it or hate it, i quite like it but others don't) It's just NOT THERE.
That to me just seems pretty bad form.
That is how games work though.
I remember Fable 3 was all about holding hands a mechanic to guide people through quests and to get closer to people in the game, so you can get a better connection with them. Yet that mechanic was barely in Fable 3, most of it was cut out.
This is why they have Alpha/Beta disclaimers regarding content, it gets changed and refined, and features are removed from the game. The only sin is that they showed people stuff first, but it's not false advertising, its features being highlighted that can be removed.
The interesting thing is, we have a case false advertising going on, with Aliens: Colonial Marines from Gearbox, and that has to do with the Press Demo's of the game being touted as "actual gameplay footage" instead of Alpha build footage, which is always subject to change. The impression and the changes done put Aliens in a different light, one that pissed off people heavily. Throw in the fact that the suit itself is over the embargo/review code part of the scandal too:
"The suit claims that by sending out review code to the press under an embargo that lifted in the early morning of Aliens: Colonial Marines' launch date of Feb. 12, the game's pre-orderers and early adopters would have no knowledge of the discrepancies between the demo and final game. As such, it seeks damages for anyone who purchased the game on or before its release date.
"Each of the 'actual gameplay' demonstrations purported to show consumers exactly what they would be buying: a cutting edge video game with very specific features and qualities," the claim reads. "Unfortunately for their fans, Defendants never told anyone — consumers, industry critics, reviewers, or reporters — that their 'actual gameplay' demonstration advertising campaign bore little resemblance to the retail product that would eventually be sold to a large community of unwitting purchasers."
Non-existent content happens. It's only false advertising when it's literally messing with the system to screw over customers. The review embargo for Unity was a delayed one for some reason, and that pissed off a lot of people against Ubisoft too.
Something not being there really doesn't matter regarding false advertising, so long as they have the legal claims of Alpha/Beta builds, which they did during the E3 presentations.
That is how games work though.
I remember Fable 3 was all about holding hands a mechanic to guide people through quests and to get closer to people in the game, so you can get a better connection with them. Yet that mechanic was barely in Fable 3, most of it was cut out.
This is why they have Alpha/Beta disclaimers regarding content, it gets changed and refined, and features are removed from the game. The only sin is that they showed people stuff first, but it's not false advertising, its features being highlighted that can be removed.
The interesting thing is, we have a case false advertising going on, with Aliens: Colonial Marines from Gearbox, and that has to do with the Press Demo's of the game being touted as "actual gameplay footage" instead of Alpha build footage, which is always subject to change. The impression and the changes done put Aliens in a different light, one that pissed off people heavily. Throw in the fact that the suit itself is over the embargo/review code part of the scandal too:
Non-existent content happens. It's only false advertising when it's literally messing with the system to screw over customers. The review embargo for Unity was a delayed one for some reason, and that pissed off a lot of people against Ubisoft too.
Something not being there really doesn't matter regarding false advertising, so long as they have the legal claims of Alpha/Beta builds, which they did during the E3 presentations.
Yes but Peter Molyneux and Gearbox are both absolute jokes! Molyneux is almost on another level of hilarious self-parody when it comes to not delivering the goods and the industry knows it. As for Gearbox, the whole thing was a complete mess.
Bioware on the other hand have a sterling reputation for immersive, in-depth, wonderful games.
They are and should be better and therefore should have accountability.
You using Fable and Aliens colonial marines as "the way things are done in video games" is an absolutely abysmal argument.
And if that IS the way things are done in video games then it's wrong and it's no wonder more people don't take our medium seriously.
If you're told you're buying a certain product then it should damn well be as formerly described when you unbox it unless reasons have been given as to why it isn't.
You'd probably have a case if you opened the game case and instead of the game it was just an 8 hour dvd filled with videos of Gaider and the EA execs rolling around in your money while twirling their mustaches.
Sorry, the law doesn't apply differently to different companies. Any difference in the reputation of Bioware compared to other companies is only remediated through public opinion, not the law.
Sorry, the law doesn't apply differently to different companies. Any difference in the reputation of Bioware compared to other companies is only remediated through public opinion, not the law
I wasn't talking about it from a perspective of what's lawful, it's my subjective opinion about what I'd like to expect from a company that I've followed and been a fan of for years. if you're content to sit back and continue getting ****** as a consumer then by all means bend over and take your medicine.
Yes but Peter Molyneux and Gearbox are both absolute jokes! Molyneux is almost on another level of hilarious self-parody when it comes to not delivering the goods and the industry knows it. As for Gearbox, the whole thing was a complete mess.
Bioware on the other hand have a sterling reputation for immersive, in-depth, wonderful games.
They are and should be better and therefore should have accountability.
You using Fable and Aliens colonial marines as "the way things are done in video games" is an absolutely abysmal argument.
And if that IS the way things are done in video games then it's wrong and it's no wonder more people don't take our medium seriously.
If you're told you're buying a certain product then it should damn well be as formerly described when you unbox it unless reasons have been given as to why it isn't.
But it happens all the time though. You just don't know about it unless they tell you, or you pay attention to the pre-release footage a lot. Deciphering and hacking games leads to a lot of beta secrets and changes in design throughout the game. It's not a question o accountability either, it's how businesses are run, not just in the gaming industry either. And honestly, saying Gearbox and Peter Molyneux are bad examples is showing ignorance on the entire subject. Regardless of your opinions, they are still a part of the gaming industry and showcase what has been going on since the 1980's.
Alternative takes and scenes in movie trailers before the final product, extended editions for dvd releases, special edition CD's or book's promising a "thrill ride to the finish" or something like that. All of that would fall under that umbrella as well, because 1) some of the quotes and things are subjective, and 2) things always change before the final product is released.
Another example. Zelda for the Wii u looked like this when it was released
https://www.youtube....h?v=u_fyOkrteqM
And now looks like this a year later.
https://www.youtube....h?v=XZmxvig1dXE
And i'll bet it will change further as we go in some ways, both gameplay and story, elements seen that won't happen, and so forth. Is that false advertising though?
Perhaps it's jaded but I've come to expect from a triple A company never to be completely up front with us. Even the whole 'made for PC' thing is sadly something I expected. Marketing takes the upper hand always because it needs to sell. It needs earn a profit. And while we, the consumers, would like to hear the truth, the sadder truth is that we get way more hyped when devs talk about making it more like Origins instead of hearing that they had to cut something out. We would've been more negative about a game if we had heard about that before release. Some people were already considering dropping the game because they couldn't romance NPC x with their chosen inquisitor. How many could've handled cut content news?
Retour en haut
