Lawyers may sue EA over Battlefield 4 bugs

If they go through with it... what do the people get? a check for $2.15 while the lawyers go out and buy a new Porsche.

Bugs are going to exist in huge software titles, accept it. I personally hate EA, but I do love the BF series. I happily paid full price for both the game and premium and have been having a blast. Dice has been very proactive about fixing the problems, so good for them.

Want to fix all this from the very start? Drop the idea that people can't get their money back for software. I accept and understand there were people who just flat could not get the game to run due to a combination of bugs and/or their hardware/software setup. To deny a refund for something that doesn't work is just silly.

In the old days I understand why you couldn't get a refund on opened software, times have changed though. EA/DICE control a master list of keys, everything is digital, and if Joe Blow wants his money back because he can't run the game, give it to him, deactivate his key, and everyone is happy. It's rather easy for EA to tell if you are running the game they can see how many hours you have played via battlelog. Of course you are going to have the shifty son'o'bitches that will play for 50 hours and then try to get a refund, tell them to go pound sand because obviously it's been working for them.
 
collegeboy69us said:
If they go through with it... what do the people get? a check for $2.15 while the lawyers go out and buy a new Porsche.
Click to expand...


People may not get a thing out of this directly but this is still quite big. Its not us gamers that are suing EA, its the investors. EA has been screwing up bad for a while now and we gamers have complained about it to no end but now even the shareholders are going "Dude, WTF?".
 
If they go through with it... what do the people get? a check for $2.15 while the lawyers go out and buy a new Porsche.
Click to expand...

I see your point but an expensive settlement would send a clear message to game developers and as gamers, we could enjoy more polished games in the future.
 
Maybe large publishers would think twice about rushing unfinished product in the future. ;)
 
RadXge said:
I see your point but an expensive settlement would send a clear message to game developers and as gamers, we could enjoy more polished games in the future.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much the plus side of such legal action. It sucks most the money goes to lawyers, but at the end of the day if it's better for gaming it's not the worst thing in the world.

Publishers and developers need to be held more accountable than they currently are for the shit they put out.
 
Hornet said:
Maybe large publishers would think twice about rushing unfinished product in the future. ;)
Click to expand...

Not if a bazillion people still shell out money for season passes for a broken game, they won't. EA was sued for their Madden franchise in 2009, and just now people are receiving $3 checks in the mail, but did that do anything for Madden 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013? Absolutely not.
 
People are stupid and will continue to be Alpha / Beta testers for products that should be %100 polished, there is LITTLE excuse for these companies to release with some of the blatantly ignored bugs that occur with them

An OS is one thing, a game is another...
 
Last edited:
MaZa said:
People may not get a thing out of this directly but this is still quite big. Its not us gamers that are suing EA, its the investors. EA has been screwing up bad for a while now and we gamers have complained about it to no end but now even the shareholders are going "Dude, WTF?".
Click to expand...
This pretty much.

It's not just about the customers buying the games, it's also about the investors and stockholders that have money invested in the company. This may force the company to get a new CEO (another one...) and restructure the company top to bottom or the other way around.

Bad products and consumer complaints look bad on the company, and look bad on the stock portfolio when stocks gets devalued. And, in return, less money for investors.

So, not surprising they're being sued. After the flap that EA (and Maxis) got over Sim City (2013), then Command & Conquer being cancelled because it was turning into a monetization F2P game that got a lot of diehard C&C fans up in arms, and now Battlefield 4 and their constant bugs and issues with the game, EA needs to stop sucking corporate dick and swallowing money like a porno star high on crack. It's a complete shame that EA has pretty much insulted not only fans of established franchises bought out by EA, but also let down its investors at the same time.
 
Last edited:
octoberasian said:
This pretty much.

It's not just about the customers buying the games, it's also about the investors and stockholders that have money invested in the company. This may force the company to get a new CEO (another one...) and restructure the company top to bottom or the other way around.

Bad products and consumer complaints look bad on the company, and look bad on the stock portfolio when stocks gets devalued. And, in return, less money for investors.

So, not surprising they're being sued. After the flap that EA (and Maxis) got over Sim City (2013), then Command & Conquer being cancelled because it was turning into a monetization F2P game that got a lot of diehard C&C fans up in harms, and now Battlefield 4 and their constant bugs and issues with the game, EA needs to stop sucking corporate dick and swallowing money like a porno star high on crack. It's a complete shame that EA has pretty much insulted not only fans of established franchises bought out by EA, but also let down its investors at the same time.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter when most people are so ignorant of just how much they get screwed.

Out of my friends they all happily pay for the new CoD or what have you and buy the season pass and stuff. As much as I try to tell them how stupid it is they just keep buying it all.
 
Azureth said:
It doesn't matter when most people are so ignorant of just how much they get screwed.

Out of my friends they all happily pay for the new CoD or what have you and buy the season pass and stuff. As much as I try to tell them how stupid it is they just keep buying it all.
Click to expand...

Hasn't COD actually been pretty reliable at launch? I haven't bought them for a while, but I was under the impression they always had pretty solid launches with minimal bugs.
 
First off EA is not being sued as yet. There is only an investigation being launched to see if there is a basis for a lawsuit on behalf of the investor and to a much lesser degree, the gamer. This in and of itself may be enough to see investor run away from EA which would be great as far as I am concerned.

Second thing is how many idiots buy the full 'premium' package and subscriptions in advance of games from a publisher that has a track record of substandard quality control and customer satisfaction. This is far from new for EA. I refused to buy anymore EA back in the days of the NFS:U 2 days after the fiasco of promised patches and no delivery. Just a new game with the promised patches and more glitches with it.

Unfortunate for me, I took a few years away from the gaming scene and ignored everything for a while. I decide to build a new gaming rig and all the hype is CoD Ghosts and BF4. I assumed EA had straightened themselves out over the years. How else could they be in business after all these years? Right?!? So I purchased both games without looking to far into them and I see the same junk problems with EA that I saw in 2004. Then I read into it more and see the same self-proclaimed idiots clamoring how this has been a problem since BF:1942.

Basically the lesson that should be learned is that what you allow is exactly what you will receive. Stop buying the shitty game releases. Stop feeding the shit developers. Suddenly you will see better products either from them or other more competent developers. This applies to more than just video games as well.
 
I support any and all lawsuits against EA. As far as I'm concerned I hope they go out of business. With the digital distribution and crowd funding age approaching, developers do not need large distribution network any longer. Publishers like EA are only good for their deep pockets, their strict timelines and willingness to only produce watered down, generic games to please the masses, is something that I won't miss.

If you read the lawsuit statement, this is actually about revenue loss from investments. To me it sounds like they want to make sure EA didn't use the BF4 release window to inflate their stock value and force out a buggy game that caused revenue loss due to poor reception.
 
Last edited:
I would be happy if I could just get a refund for the $100 I spent on the piece of shit. It is an ENORMOUS step backwards from even BF3 which I enjoyed thoroughly.
 
bigdogchris said:
I support any and all lawsuits against EA. As far as I'm concerned I hope they go out of business. With the digital distribution and crowd funding age approaching, developers do not need large distribution network any longer. Publishers like EA are only good for their deep pockets, their strict timelines and willingness to only produce watered down, generic games to please the masses, is something that I won't miss.

If you read the lawsuit statement, this is actually about revenue loss from investments. To me it sounds like they want to make sure EA didn't use the BF4 release window to inflate their stock value and force out a buggy game that caused revenue loss due to poor reception.
Click to expand...

Developers still need money to develop, hence publishers. The distribution channels may be better these days, but developers will always need money and I'm sure even with the simplified distribution channels, many developers will want advertising for their games which also costs money.
 
Liqq said:
... It is an ENORMOUS step backwards from even BF3 which I enjoyed thoroughly.
Click to expand...

When it's working properly... and that's an important qualifier... I honestly don't get these kinds of statements. Can you cite me some specifics, please? Because I must be playing a different BF4 than you are.
 
Tudz said:
Developers still need money to develop, hence publishers. The distribution channels may be better these days, but developers will always need money and I'm sure even with the simplified distribution channels, many developers will want advertising for their games which also costs money.
Click to expand...
Thus my comment on crowd funding. Reliance on publishers like EA, because of their wallets, are becoming more irrelevant as time passes. Eventually they won't be able to dictate to developers what type of game to make. You should look at some of the KS videos inXile put up for their titles and how they mock the crap they go through with publishers.
 
I shelled out the extra cash to get china rising early...


still havent been able to play china rising. they didnt even offer the full premium edition during the beta you had to buy a noncomplete version to play with their hopes of you paying for the same extras later when you go full prem


fuck ea
 
Q-BZ said:
When it's working properly... and that's an important qualifier... I honestly don't get these kinds of statements. Can you cite me some specifics, please? Because I must be playing a different BF4 than you are.
Click to expand...

Just having to say that alone makes this game even more damning proof of the level of incapability EA/DICE both deserve scorn for.

PC gamers expect bugs , we are use to them to a degree. But BF4 was not a "beta" release it was a full retail AAA backed title. It came to us in Alpha form at best and its still a crap shoot. I really enjoyed the years of BF games I've had but ever since BF3 the degrading release of BF games has been intolerable. Now its hit its fuck up "peak" and its caused me to swear off BF games entirely.

If I was a stockholder I would be happy to join in on a suit because EA took everyone for a ride with this release. No one is going to forget how messy this launch was. And thanks to such laziness COD has gotten a boost it didn't deserve as a side effect. So its a two fold fuck up for FPS gaming entirely.
 
Anyone think they will offer people refunds? Possibly under pressure?
 
I don't care about a refund because eventually(hopefully) they will get most of the major bugs fixed and it will be worth picking back up. However I would definitely like to have the tens of thousands points I have lost due to crashes back.
 
the suit is for the stock holders not the users.
F the users you know that.
 
xLokiX said:
I don't care about a refund because eventually(hopefully) they will get most of the major bugs fixed and it will be worth picking back up. However I would definitely like to have the tens of thousands points I have lost due to crashes back.
Click to expand...

That would be true if a game were worth the same amount of money at launch as it is a month or two after launch. Since it's not, if I paid the premium to get it at launch I expect it to work at launch. Publishers make the most money off a game at launch, so the least they can do is deliver a working title.
 
Tudz said:
That's pretty much the plus side of such legal action. It sucks most the money goes to lawyers, but at the end of the day if it's better for gaming it's not the worst thing in the world.

Publishers and developers need to be held more accountable than they currently are for the shit they put out.
Click to expand...

So in other words, you'd rather have a 100% finished game that is oft-delayed and takes very few development risks for fear of being sued if it's out only 95% functionally and takes risks + large development advances that may have bugs to bring you a revolutionary game? Sounds smart /sarcasm :rolleyes: . They are held accountable: stop buying their stuff if you don't like what you're seeing. But nope, I think you people would rather just whine and pretend you care (when you really just want more more more), while you clearly don't actually care since you keep opening your wallets and throwing wads of cash at game companies ;). If you really cared you wouldn't be supporting them by playing or buying their games.

And please, people, spare the hyperbolic "IT'S PRE-ALPHA AT BEST!!!1111" or "OMG IT'S UNPLAYABLE" remarks: it's simply not the case. It works for the vast majority of people, and those of us who do have some bugs occasionally like myself still can play it properly 99% of the time anyway. If I didn't think it was worth the money off of the pre-release demo I wouldn't have bought it. You knew what you were buying, and if you didn't, it still is perfectly acceptable for the scope and complexity of this kind of game at its current level.
 
GoldenTiger said:
So in other words, you'd rather have a 100% finished game that is oft-delayed and takes very few development risks for fear of being sued if it's out only 95% functionally and takes risks + large development advances that may have bugs to bring you a revolutionary game? Sounds smart /sarcasm :rolleyes: . They are held accountable: stop buying their stuff if you don't like what you're seeing. But nope, I think you people would rather just whine and pretend you care (when you really just want more more more), while you clearly don't actually care since you keep opening your wallets and throwing wads of cash at game companies ;). If you really cared you wouldn't be supporting them by playing or buying their games.
Click to expand...

So you're saying EA/DICE should not be held accountable for the state BF4 was shipped in?
 
Kckazdude said:
First off EA is not being sued as yet. There is only an investigation being launched to see if there is a basis for a lawsuit on behalf of the investor and to a much lesser degree, the gamer. This in and of itself may be enough to see investor run away from EA which would be great as far as I am concerned.

Second thing is how many idiots buy the full 'premium' package and subscriptions in advance of games from a publisher that has a track record of substandard quality control and customer satisfaction. This is far from new for EA. I refused to buy anymore EA back in the days of the NFS:U 2 days after the fiasco of promised patches and no delivery. Just a new game with the promised patches and more glitches with it.

Unfortunate for me, I took a few years away from the gaming scene and ignored everything for a while. I decide to build a new gaming rig and all the hype is CoD Ghosts and BF4. I assumed EA had straightened themselves out over the years. How else could they be in business after all these years? Right?!? So I purchased both games without looking to far into them and I see the same junk problems with EA that I saw in 2004. Then I read into it more and see the same self-proclaimed idiots clamoring how this has been a problem since BF:1942.

Basically the lesson that should be learned is that what you allow is exactly what you will receive. Stop buying the shitty game releases. Stop feeding the shit developers. Suddenly you will see better products either from them or other more competent developers. This applies to more than just video games as well.
Click to expand...

I think you know how unrealistic that is...

It's like a vegetarian thinking "If I can convince enough people to not eat chickens, they'll stop butchering them". WRONG. That means more meat for everyone else.

No one is going to not buy a game they want to love that much. I thought about not buying it but then all the BF3 servers went away and my friends jumped...what am I supposed to do?

I'm not really sure what the solution is. For me, the game has crashed maybe twice in 40 hours of play. Netcode is still poopy though.
 
GoldenTiger said:
So in other words, you'd rather have a 100% finished game that is oft-delayed and takes very few development risks for fear of being sued if it's out only 95% functionally and takes risks + large development advances that may have bugs to bring you a revolutionary game? Sounds smart /sarcasm :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I'm sure IF BF4 was a revolutionary game that took risks, people would be cutting DICE more slack. But to put out such a small incremental update to BF3, charge people full price, and have poor launch stability is just too much for many to bear. Understandably so.
 
How many of you guys are playing this on a console? I havent played on PC but I would put my name on a lawsuit against EA.

It looks like they just mixed together some BF, some ghost recon, some Warfighter, and some COD and sent it out to the public.
 
drako said:
I'm sure IF BF4 was a revolutionary game that took risks, people would be cutting DICE more slack. But to put out such a small incremental update to BF3, charge people full price, and have poor launch stability is just too much for many to bear. Understandably so.
Click to expand...

So, what other games of bf scale graphics complexity and multiplayer do you play that work better? Please, I expect a HUGE list, if you can even come up with one.
 
class action suit for ea and dice due to not producing a battlefield game should be great.
 
GoldenTiger said:
So, what other games of bf scale graphics complexity and multiplayer do you play that work better? Please, I expect a HUGE list, if you can even come up with one.
Click to expand...
I don't play MP games anymore, so you're asking the wrong person. But I don't think it's too much to ask to have a game work properly at launch, and I definitely understand why people are upset. It wasn't the scale/complexity/whatever of BF4 that led to a buggy release, it was the strict adherence to a launch window by EA when clearly the game was not ready.
 
drako said:
I don't play MP games anymore, so you're asking the wrong person. But I don't think it's too much to ask to have a game work properly at launch, and I definitely understand why people are upset. It wasn't the scale/complexity/whatever of BF4 that led to a buggy release, it was the strict adherence to a launch window by EA when clearly the game was not ready.
Click to expand...

It does work for most people, though. Additionally, the game was delayed internally, not rushed out.
 
These lawsuits do nothing but generate publicity... yes the launch was a complete fail... yes EA Games has sucked the life and creativity out of it's IP's, yes EA Games is the juggernaut of evil of the gaming world but ultimately you are not afforded any protections against such events. EA just has to regain the trust of it's customers this type of corporate attitude only helps the alternate market of indie games or free to play and that type of emerging non-mainstream companies.
 
Buddy got a full $120 refund yesterday. Level 110 and well over 100 hours played.
 
Is it wrong of me to be OK with EA having to give buckets of money to the lawyers?
 
GoldenTiger said:
So in other words, you'd rather have a 100% finished game that is oft-delayed and takes very few development risks for fear of being sued if it's out only 95% functionally and takes risks + large development advances that may have bugs to bring you a revolutionary game? Sounds smart /sarcasm :rolleyes: .
Click to expand...
No, that's not what I said. :rolleyes:
They are held accountable: stop buying their stuff if you don't like what you're seeing. But nope, I think you people would rather just whine and pretend you care (when you really just want more more more), while you clearly don't actually care since you keep opening your wallets and throwing wads of cash at game companies ;). If you really cared you wouldn't be supporting them by playing or buying their games.
Click to expand...
You are inferring a lot of things there. I don't buy games at launch from companies I don't support and don't trust.

However, that's not good enough. The games shouldn't be fucked in the first place. If they aren't going to let us get a refund on our games if they don't work satisfactorily, then "don't buy future games from the same company" is not good enough of a solution to me. They already have your money. Companies that charge top dollar for their games at launch need to be held more accountable than some forum dweller telling me "just don't buy BF5, that'll teach them!".

Developers should only take risks as large as they can manage. If they can't manage it, it should be their problem not our (the paying customers) problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top