40 réponses à ce sujet

[introverted_assassin]

I've never had to do anything like this as far as gaming is concerned. It strikes me as very odd and makes me really uncomfortable that this was done. It was literally "oh let's see if I want to play this game today" and that message pops up. Something...*Oprah head shake*...something about that doesn't curl all the way over for me.

[10K]

 They are very anti-consumer. 

 

I've known this before even knowing about this section 20. Is it so hard to believe? Just look at their games, that's all the evidence you need. 

[GreatBlueHeron]

They are scared of frivilous lawsuits obviously.

They're one of the few, then. Seems like the companies that regularly screw over their customers do this, like Sony. Sensitive information hacked, network down for weeks. At least they gave everyone a couple free games, but that's little consolation to those who had credit card numbers on their accounts. Lol, EA probably wouldn't even do anything as a token for a similar situation. As much as Sony screws up, they aren't complete douches. EA? I honestly can't find anything redeeming. I'll likely click accept so that I can keep playing the multiplayer that will soon lose support. Likely the only EA game I'll get will be me Andromeda, but it will be used (no dlc and no money to mp, and I was one of those people who spent a couple hundred on me mp because it was worth supporting). Every other EA game...meh. My drop of support won't matter to EA, but it will matter to the other pubs/devs who will get more of my money.

[c0bra951]

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

 

Actually, that is the last thing you want.  The more obtuse and obfuscated the legalese, the poorer your understanding, the less likely it will ever be enforced against you in a court of law.

 

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.  But this isn't law.  These are the wishes of a private citizen.

[Ieldra]

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.

Is that even legal? I'd have to look it up for my country, but I'd be surprised if that was possible between a company and end-users in the EU. Such clauses tend to be restricted to the business world for a reason.

[Akrabra]

Is that even legal? I'd have to look it up for my country, but I'd be surprised if that was possible between a company and end-users in the EU. Such clauses tend to be restricted to the business world for a reason.

In Europe i would not think this possible no. Atleast it is not here in Norway. The US on the other hand is a different beast when it comes to corporations doing shady stuff. 

[GreatBlueHeron]

Yeah, I should have specified that this is a 'merican thing.

[chance52]

Is that even legal? I'd have to look it up for my country, but I'd be surprised if that was possible between a company and end-users in the EU. Such clauses tend to be restricted to the business world for a reason.

 

It's legal to put these clauses in but they mean nothing and have been around for many, many years. If you want to sue, you can sue. These clauses are not new. 

 

All of those radio contests have waivers too, "in case of injury or death or I didn't win a prize, we can't take legal action" Not exact wording obviously but while working for a radio station years ago I asked about those clauses and was told people sue just fine, any half-decent lawyer gets those taken out of the equation in short order.

[introverted_assassin]

^^^thank you for pointing that out. I have no intention of suing them...at the moment, at least lol. I feel like they're worried about something which is why they're updating the ToS. I read the language...and then gave it to my attorney buddy because nope and she said the same thing.

[Rawgrim]

So basically what this is is "You have to promise not to sue us. If you don't we won't allow you to play the game you just bought". Am I understanding this correctly?

[introverted_assassin]

it's my take away from it. at least the online features and even this forum. literally it's saying if you don't agree to the ToS that you can't(or shouldn't) use anything EA related. they asked nicely. so i guess technically, i'm not supposed to be posting here. I couldn't, in good conscious, accept that ToS because I didn't understand some of the more complicated language until my buddy broke it down.

my eyebrows always raise when the word "pursuant" is involved.

[andy6915]

So this is them not letting us last-gen owners being able to sue them for their false advertising and cutting of support without warning? Good, they should be afraid of us striking back.

[raging_monkey]

Hahaha omfg this is madness

[GreatBlueHeron]

So this is them not letting us last-gen owners being able to sue them for their false advertising and cutting of support without warning? Good, they should be afraid of us striking back.

Maybe, maybe not. They could have had this in the works for months (same with the dropped support, though). If they were really worried about us suing them, they would do the right thing in the first place and look out for their customers. EA is just awful.

[raging_monkey]

Its a load of be imo

[Kantr]

It's not Just EA that have this though. Valve did it.(they also added a clause to get themselves out of refunds) [This was before they did refunds]