Activision Confirms it Could Kill PS3 Black Ops Servers, But Says it Won't

[Ghengis John]

For what it's worth, I don't think that Carson's statement was intended to be threatening; I think it was a rebuttal to the idea that Activision was breaking the law. Still, it seems like an odd thing to have said, and it's not hard to imagine why someone might have taken it badly.

What makes you think it's an odd thing to say, Logan? In my opinion, it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to say. The point at the heart of this is that the option to shut down the servers exists, and Carson simply stated that as one of the potential options to fixing the problem.

That's not what he meant at all. He meant "we're not breaking any laws, the servers are entirely out of the government's hands." I normally hate those big bad corporations too. They do wrong the little guy all the time. This is not one of those times.

Like this guy says:

What does the "free PSN" have anything to do with it? Does XBLA give them money to run servers on their service?

I believe it has everything to do with it. The fact that PSN is free means that Activision has more rights to do what they want with their service, because users don't require compensation. As XBL is a pay service, I imagine there are more terms and conditions for service providers and therefore more hoops they must jump through to remove a service because a paying user has more rights.

makes sense, then what the rep said is DEFINITELY a threat even if he didn't mean it to be.

It's in no way a threat. It was a statement of fact used to rebute one of the users arguments and threats. The CSR was simply stating that if the servers can be shut down at any time, then it's not possible for poor connection to be illegal.

Look up definitions of 'Threat' http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&q=define%3A+threat&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

None of those fit what the CSR said as there was no menace or intent. He simply made a statement of fact.

 

[Xennon]

This is like saying the city is outright threatening to shut down bus service because they said "if it's snowing buses may not be able to run, so the city has the right to cancel routes accordingly."

That analogy beautifully sums up how retarded that situation was.

This. It's clear that it was made in reference to the 'Activision is breaking the law' bit. The user was saying that Activision was breaking the law by offering a multiplayer service that users are having trouble connecting too (thus the service is not as advertised). The CS rep is simply stating that that cannot be true as Activision has the right to shut it's servers down and no servers at all is less multiplayer than connection problems, but it's still legal. It is actually a very good rebuttal to what WAS a threat from the user (i'll report you to the government). He certainly wasn't suggesting Activision WOULD do it, he was just saying that they COULD as a means of proving the legality threat useless.

What does the "free PSN" have anything to do with it? Does XBLA give them money to run servers on their service?

I believe it has everything to do with it. The fact that PSN is free means that Activision has more rights to do what they want with their service, because users don't require compensation. As XBL is a pay service, I imagine there are more terms and conditions for service providers and therefore more hoops they must jump through to remove a service because a paying user has more rights.

Oh, and because I never touched on the 'And this may be a viable solution' part (because I know others will ). That still isn't a threat, it is again just stating that if the whole thing really is broken, that someone higher up may take that decision to help solve the problem. He never states it would be permenantly taking the servers down, or if it would just be taking down the troublesome servers, allowing users to connect to non troublesome ones. He simply said that the situation was in the realms of possiblity if the problem was really as widespread and as dire as it sounded (I.E causing hardware failures for people. If Activisions servers were breaking peoples hardware, you're damn right they would take the servers down in an instant until they had the issue sorted Not quite sure HOW a server would cause hardware failure, but thats another matter entirely )

I also don't know if PSN has a Paying section and a Free section, but if it does and the load on the servers caused by the Free section was impacting the connectivity for the Pay customers, again, Activision would prioritise the Pay customers by removing servers and thus load from Free customers.

 

[Dfskelleton]

THIS JUST IN: Trees are made of wood.
OF COURSE they can kill the servers! They control the game! They could make it so everyone who has it can't play it just cause they feel like it!

 

[Throwitawaynow]

He was offered a sealed version of the game to return to the store, a new Activision game of equal or lesser value and something else let me check kotaku. Or give him an xbox 360 or PC version of the game. They essentially gave him a full refund except for cash because they arn't allowed. They explained everything they could do, they gave him everything they could and people blame the company. Blind as bats in here, you may hate the company, or how the game was handled but in this particular case Activision is in the right.

 

[DTWolfwood]

What does the "free PSN" have anything to do with it? Does XBLA give them money to run servers on their service?

I believe it has everything to do with it. The fact that PSN is free means that Activision has more rights to do what they want with their service, because users don't require compensation. As XBL is a pay service, I imagine there are more terms and conditions for service providers and therefore more hoops they must jump through to remove a service because a paying user has more rights.

makes sense, then what the rep said is DEFINITELY a threat even if he didn't mean it to be.

It's in no way a threat. It was a statement of fact used to rebute one of the users arguments and threats. The CSR was simply stating that if the servers can be shut down at any time, then it's not possible for poor connection to be illegal.

Look up definitions of 'Threat' http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&q=define%3A+threat&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

None of those fit what the CSR said as there was no menace or intent. He simply made a statement of fact.

"The publishers have the right to shut down the servers for their game at any time as well which based on the number of reported posts from users may be a viable solution over the free PSN."

That's stating a fact. Everything else implies possible intent.

 

[Dogstile]

-sighs- I'm going to have to deal with assholes like these soon enough.

Customer service guy is right. Their servers, ps3 users ain't paying for them, they don't have to host them. Simple fact of life.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

"The publishers have the right to shut down the servers for their game at any time as well which based on the number of reported posts from users may be a viable solution over the free PSN."

That's stating a fact. Everything else implies possible intent.

I'm going to shut down the servers. I can shut down the servers. I can shut down the servers, based on evidence and reports it may be a viable solution. Only 1 is a threat.

 

[DTWolfwood]

"The publishers have the right to shut down the servers for their game at any time as well which based on the number of reported posts from users may be a viable solution over the free PSN."

That's stating a fact. Everything else implies possible intent.

I'm going to shut down the servers. I can shut down the servers. I can shut down the servers, based on evidence and reports it may be a viable solution. Only 1 is a threat.

your english is superior i admit defeat

i can certainly see why mr. Koblovsky thought what he thought.

 

[squid5580]

What does the "free PSN" have anything to do with it? Does XBLA give them money to run servers on their service?

I believe it has everything to do with it. The fact that PSN is free means that Activision has more rights to do what they want with their service, because users don't require compensation. As XBL is a pay service, I imagine there are more terms and conditions for service providers and therefore more hoops they must jump through to remove a service because a paying user has more rights.

makes sense, then what the rep said is DEFINITELY a threat even if he didn't mean it to be.

It's in no way a threat. It was a statement of fact used to rebute one of the users arguments and threats. The CSR was simply stating that if the servers can be shut down at any time, then it's not possible for poor connection to be illegal.

Look up definitions of 'Threat' http://www.google.co.uk/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&q=define%3A+threat&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1

None of those fit what the CSR said as there was no menace or intent. He simply made a statement of fact.

"The publishers have the right to shut down the servers for their game at any time as well which based on the number of reported posts from users may be a viable solution over the free PSN."

That's stating a fact. Everything else implies possible intent.

He said it is a viable solution. Just like doing a mass recall is a viable solution. He can't say they won't shut it down just like he can't say they will. He said there is a possibility they will. Just like there is a possibility Acti could be shutting everything down and locking their doors as I type this. Sure it is highly improbable but definitely not impossible.

My gawd gamers are a sensitive lot.

 

[DTWolfwood]

read post immediately above your post.

 

[squid5580]

read post immediately above your post.

Do you mean the post that was made while I was typing mine? The one that wasn't there when I started? Or are you not aware that while making a post you can't see the other posts that are happening in real time?

 

[DTWolfwood]

read post immediately above your post.

Do you mean the post that was made while I was typing mine? The one that wasn't there when I started? Or are you not aware that while making a post you can't see the other posts that are happening in real time?

I meant that literally as "read the post immediately above your post." as its an adequate response, there is no malice or intent in my factual statement

lol love it when it goes full circle.

 

[TilMorrow]

I wouldn't really care if they shut down the BlOps servers infact I bet it would be funny to see the reprecussions of that act. Mostly wouldn't mind after learning about the price for the upcoming map pack. 1200 MSPs again... seriously Activision almost every other game sells their map packs for 800 MSPs.

I have to lol at Activision's show of power though in that point.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Someone in customer service has a bad day. That's what I think, at least.

I'd imagine that's every day for someone connected to Black Ops.

Even on 360 the servers are fucking shit.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

So instead of actually telling the customer that "Yeah we are(n't) working on a fix for the problem" he basically pulls the finger at him and says "We really don't care, we can take it whenever we want, so take it or leave it"

I'm sorry but I think its irresponsible Customer Service

Except it's not.

There are many. many videos on youtube with evidence of the horrible PS3 servers. David Vanderhaar and Josh Olin are constantly being spammed on Twitter by angry fans. There is definitely a problem here.

I play on 360 but if I were a PS3 owner I would be pissed.

 

[squid5580]

read post immediately above your post.

Do you mean the post that was made while I was typing mine? The one that wasn't there when I started? Or are you not aware that while making a post you can't see the other posts that are happening in real time?

I meant that literally as "read the post immediately above your post." as its an adequate response, there is no malice or intent in my factual statement

lol love it when it goes full circle.

Yeah he said basically the same thing I did using a different analogy. I fail to see your point. Or do you not understand what Rationalization is saying? Or do you not understand that when I was posting mine his post did not exist yet? Please explain.

 

[Jonny49]

I kinda wish they would shut it down. Can you imagine the gigantic lashing Activision would take? It would make my day lol

Same here. And end this CoD mania for good. So I can point to all these 'skill less' players and laugh into their faces, for supporting a Publisher that blows.

Hardly fair on those who just want to play CoD online for enjoyments sake though is it?

OT: CoD has always had shit servers on the PS3 though, I remember MW2 being particularly annoying. I guess it comes with the territory?