40 réponses à ce sujet

[GreatBlueHeron]

http://tos.ea.com/le...n/PC/#section20

Check out section 20. Was this in here before or something similar? It popped up after I lost my connection to mp. I have yet to accept it.

ETA: So, EA fans think this is okay? Do gamers in general think this is okay? Further evidence they view us as nothing more than money spigots. Each little thing is adding up--at this point I'm debating if I should even buy a next gen console. I love video games, but at what costs? If you gamergaters actually want to do something positive rather than harass women in your free time, THIS **** right here is something to take a stand against.

[GithCheater]

I have "liked" many of your posts concern last-gen DAI, but I definitely cannot like this post.

 

Binding arbitration seems ok to me, because small claims court lawsuits are still permitted.

 

How much money do you want to be awarded from a legal lottery lawsuit?

 

In my opinion, a plaintiff should be only entitled to a refund and court costs.  Punitive awards seem outlandish for a video game that cannot cause a physical injury.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Are there any "EA fans"? The interaction between EA and its customers is more like an abusive relationship where EA abuses us and we keep coming back for more.

[GithCheater]

Are there any "EA fans"? The interaction between EA and its customers is more like an abusive relationship where EA abuses us and we keep coming back for more.

 

This "clause 20" is NOT an example of an abusive relationship.  However, suddenly stopping last-gen DAI support without explanation (only a flip marketing-speak) can definitely be interpreted as abusive.

 

Insisting on a high cost lawsuit for a video game that fills lawyer's pockets seems ludicrous to me.

[TheOgre]

I'm not going to try to sue over DAI; I had an average to good time over it. I'm slightly annoyed they have this kind of thing but I can see why they'd have it.

[GreatBlueHeron]

I have "liked" many of your posts concern last-gen DAI, but I definitely cannot like this post.
 
Binding arbitration seems ok to me, because small claims court lawsuits are still permitted.
 
How much money do you want to be awarded from a legal lottery lawsuit?
 
In my opinion, a plaintiff should be only entitled to a refund and court costs.  Punitive awards seem outlandish for a video game that cannot cause a physical injury.

It's not about getting a lottery payday. These agreements completely benefit the company. The consumer? You have to play by their system rather than go through a court of law. There is no objectivity in EA's demand. Apparently sony did the same thing in 2011, something I completely missed. Thats ok, because I'm leaning to never buying in to the current gen, anyways.

I wouldn't be upset if ea had just done the right thing in the first place by supporting last gen. They are very anti-consumer. I, for obvious reasons, can't get behind that at all.

[GreatBlueHeron]

double post

[nightscrawl]

ETA: So, EA fans think this is okay? Do gamers in general think this is okay? Further evidence they view us as nothing more than money spigots.

But we are money spigots. Some businesses will do various things in order to keep the spigot open (that is, make various efforts to keep customers happy, within reason) but let's not kid ourselves as to how they view us on the corporate level. I think a clause like this is perfectly reasonable, understandable, and predictable.

 

I think you need to go down to the developer level where you basically have gamers making games, to find those who do actually care. But then those individuals are constrained by higher authority and there is a limit on how much they can do for us.

 

But to answer your question, as Darkly Tranquil said, "Are there any 'EA fans'?" I rather doubt it. Most gamers associated with the brand will be a fan of a studio that EA owns, like Bioware. I am a Bioware fan, not an EA fan. If I have to "agree to the terms" to play, then so be it. And no, I don't think that my insignificant self refusing to agree on the grounds of some lame principle will actually solve anything, or even if every single person on this forum refused. There are more than enough elsewhere that will agree to make up for the loss.

[coldflame]

...EA fans...

I don't think such thing exist. It is just a figment of someone's imagination.

[panzerwzh]

I don't think such thing exist. It is just a figment of someone's imagination.

Or a shad of someone's broken self-esteem.

[Akrabra]

So, EA fans 

I doubt you'll find any EA fans here. We are mostly here to support Bioware who is unlucky enough to have been bought up by EA. And don't act like EA is the only company enforcing stupidity. Activision-Blizzard is no better, or Ubisoft and that is just in the gaming world.

[Torgette]

It's pretty **** but they aren't the first ones to do this, same clause has been in Sony's EULA since 2011.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Most gamers associated with the brand will be a fan of a studio that EA owns, like Bioware. I am a Bioware fan, not an EA fan. If I have to "agree to the terms" to play, then so be it. And no, I don't think that my insignificant self refusing to agree on the grounds of some lame principle will actually solve anything, or even if every single person on this forum refused. There are more than enough elsewhere that will agree to make up for the loss.

Personally, DA games are the only exception to my "No EA" rule. I also have a "No Ubisoft" rule and a "No Activision" rule. I haven't bought anything made by those companies for several years and don't plan to in future. I know it makes little difference in the grand scheme of things, but at least I know I'm not contributing to these rotten companies. I imagine that eventually all the publishers will annoy me sufficiently (WB is one more screw up away from joining my blacklist) and I will give up gaming altogether and just go back to reading books since book publishers don't seem prone to abusive and exploitative business practices intended to screw their customers. I already gave up Warhammer due to GW being horrendous jerks, so it won't be the first hobby I've abandoned in disgust.

[c0bra951]

Since there is no chance I will ever hire a lawyer over a videogame, such anticonsumer clauses don't really impact me in any way.  However, evaluated simply as an academic exercise, they are certainly abusive and should be outright illegal.  From a contractual-law standpoint, there is no consideration given to the consumer in exchange for the additional restrictions.  Therefore, such a contract cannot be legally enforced.  [I should have also mentioned the grossly unequal bargaining power.  The company has it all; the consumer has none, except to do without the goods or services.]  They will hold no sway in some countries who actually adhere to such principles.  But I suspect the USA is entirely lost to the corporate giants.

Modifié par c0bra951, 21 juillet 2015 - 07:27 .

[GreatBlueHeron]

I seriously doubt I'd hire a lawyer over a video game, too. I'm just stubborn--I'm mad because ethics. It would be as if McDonalds decided to make you sign a waiver every time you purchase something (or they could track your purchases so that you only have to sign again when the tos changes). It's ridiculous. It wouldn't be so bad if EA looked out for the fans. They don't. And sadly, Bioware is fully EA. They aren't Bioware any longer. Bethesda's still good, right? Does Microsoft do this with Xbox? Never thought I'd say this, but the One is looking like my best option if I decide to continue my hobby.

[FKA_Servo]

I seriously doubt I'd hire a lawyer over a video game, too. I'm just stubborn--I'm mad because ethics. It would be as if McDonalds decided to make you sign a waiver every time you purchase something (or they could track your purchases so that you only have to sign again when the tos changes). It's ridiculous. It wouldn't be so bad if EA looked out for the fans. They don't. And sadly, Bioware is fully EA. They aren't Bioware any longer. Bethesda's still good, right? Does Microsoft do this with Xbox? Never thought I'd say this, but the One is looking like my best option if I decide to continue my hobby.

 

Microsoft has a tendency to buy up crappy exclusivity deals, as you should well know. But then, so does Sony.

 

That said, you should build a gaming PC.

[Akrabra]

I seriously doubt I'd hire a lawyer over a video game, too. I'm just stubborn--I'm mad because ethics. It would be as if McDonalds decided to make you sign a waiver every time you purchase something (or they could track your purchases so that you only have to sign again when the tos changes). It's ridiculous. It wouldn't be so bad if EA looked out for the fans. They don't. And sadly, Bioware is fully EA. They aren't Bioware any longer. Bethesda's still good, right? Does Microsoft do this with Xbox? Never thought I'd say this, but the One is looking like my best option if I decide to continue my hobby.

I would say that Bethesda is one of the last modern developers that don't pull this kind of bull, but that does not mean they are without flaws or that they care about us fans immensly (though more than others). I guess you just have to decide what is the most important to you, ethics or having fun with videogames.

[FKA_Servo]

I would say that Bethesda is one of the last modern developers that don't pull this kind of bull, but that does not mean they are without flaws or that they care about us fans immensly (though more than others). I guess you just have to decide what is the most important to you, ethics or having fun with videogames.

 

They arguably originated this bull with horse armor. I think they've just been understandably chagrined these past several years.

 

On the other hand, if they go ahead with their plans for monetizing mods and user generated content - and they very well might - they will be irredeemable monsters, and the worst of the pack. I'm not at all kidding.

[GreatBlueHeron]

They don't have to kiss my butt or anything near that, just not screw me over. I joke about bethesdas buggy games, but its something I accept.

[Akrabra]

They arguably originated this bull with horse armor. I think they've just been understandably chagrined these past several years.

 

On the other hand, if they go ahead with their plans for monetizing mods and user generated content - and they very well might - they will be irredeemable monsters, and the worst of the pack. I'm not at all kidding.

Well Oblivion was one of the first games to ever introduce DLC and as stated by Todd Howard they had to test what the people wanted. I agree it sucked, but look at Bioware now with the new armor packs for 5 bucks (sigh). After that Bethesda has only made single player DLC's with rich content for a good price. Skyrim beeing the best. Also they never do silly pre-order bonuses. They have one now if you pre-order FO4 for Xbox One you get FO3 Goty with it. 

 

Monetizing mods is a can of worms i won't open here, but i agree with you. 

[9TailsFox]

Ok can someone please translate what it means, from terms of agreement to human language.

[GreatBlueHeron]

Basically they want you to waive your right to sue them as an individual or as part of a class action suit and go through their arbitration instead, which is set up to purely benefit them. Not sure what they're so scared of.

[Rawgrim]

I have "liked" many of your posts concern last-gen DAI, but I definitely cannot like this post.

 

Binding arbitration seems ok to me, because small claims court lawsuits are still permitted.

 

How much money do you want to be awarded from a legal lottery lawsuit?

 

In my opinion, a plaintiff should be only entitled to a refund and court costs.  Punitive awards seem outlandish for a video game that cannot cause a physical injury.

 

It can cause stress. Stress can damage the body. It can also affect your sleep. Which can lead to an accident the next day, when you are driving your car.

[GreatBlueHeron]

Lol!

[GithCheater]

Basically they want you to waive your right to sue them as an individual or as part of a class action suit and go through their arbitration instead, which is set up to purely benefit them. Not sure what they're so scared of.

They are scared of frivilous lawsuits obviously.