EA bans another DA2 customer

[PixieDiamond]

This is why I feel sad at knowing that EA has its claws in the Mass Effect universe...

 

[Brian Hendershot]

He should be banned. He was using Internet Explorer!

Seriously though, this story is sketch.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Just like the times when the Church used to rule the states, am I right or am I right, fellas?

Corporate meddling. There needs to be separation between Corporate and Developing now.

 

[Kikosemmek]

And to think, all this over a mediocre game.

 

[eezaak]

Or just download a pirated version of the game? Hell, if you've payed for it and can't play it. This seems very fair.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I hope someone sues these fuckers, seriously. I don't care what it says in the contract, taking someone's money and then revoking their right to use what they legally paid for is theft, plain and simple. If they can't take a little hate and try to do this every time someone OH WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH DOESN'T LIKE MY GAME WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH, they're not going to be in this business too much longer. Eventually someone is going to point out that they're stealing from their customers, and they're going to get their asses handed to them in a court room (assuming the judge and jury aren't as corrupt as they are). Or someone could just bomb their offices, either way.

It's a shame, too, because I was starting to warm up to EA for a few months there. Apart from a few poor-taste marketing campaigns, they'd been publishing some decent games and weren't being colossal dicks. But now it appears that was just a brief fluke. Oh well, I guess I won't be giving them my business in the future.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

EULA's aren't legally binding. Because by the time you 'agree' to them, the transaction has already taken place. EULA's would only have any kind of legal standing if you had to read and agree to them before you actually handed money over for the game. Just because it tries to paint itself as a legal document, doesn't mean it is. I could make you sign a contract which declares your family and all your property to now belong to me. Doesn't mean it would stand up in a court of law. Indeed, any judge or lawyer would laugh me out of court.

Fair divs, I wasn't aware that the EULA wasn't legally binding. The point still stands however, that he was warned that should he breach the terms of the agreement to the forums then he would have his account banned and any games linked to that account would be locked. It's unfair, but he really should have just acted normally instead of flaming the guys who insulted Bioware. It's really just a matter of principle over PR for Bioware and EA, they have their money but they need to protect their reputation.

 

[Tony2077]

I'd personally like to know more before i condemn either of them seems some people like the guiltily till proven innocence way of thinking.

 

[michael87cn]

So the guy knew about the previous guy getting banned for violating the terms of service for their forums by posting inappropriately, and so he does the same thing, and is shocked?

He deserves to lose access to his game, the first guy didn't but the SECOND guy knew he could get in trouble and didn't care.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

I hope someone sues these fuckers, seriously. I don't care what it says in the contract, taking someone's money and then revoking their right to use what they legally paid for is theft, plain and simple. If they can't take a little hate and try to do this every time someone OH WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH DOESN'T LIKE MY GAME WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH, they're not going to be in this business too much longer. Eventually someone is going to point out that they're stealing from their customers, and they're going to get their asses handed to them in a court room (assuming the judge and jury aren't as corrupt as they are). Or someone could just bomb their offices, either way.

It's a shame, too, because I was starting to warm up to EA for a few months there. Apart from a few poor-taste marketing campaigns, they'd been publishing some decent games and weren't being colossal dicks. But now it appears that was just a brief fluke. Oh well, I guess I won't be giving them my business in the future.

The dictionary disagrees.

theft-
1. criminal law - the dishonest taking of property belonging to another person with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of its possession

How is that disagreeing? They intend to stop him from playing his game which he paid for, which is in effect, depriving him of ownership (because the right to play the game is what he paid for, in fact).

I also have my doubts whether this whole issue is legit or if I'm missing something between the lines, but in any case, they shouldn't have the right to ban him from playing. From posting on forums, sure, but not being able to play single player games is going a bit far. However, is it actually required to log in before playing? I know Battlefield is, but DA:2?

 

[Baneat]

If EA banned me, I'd never pay for another one of their games..

I'd pirate the ones I owned, and sever the tie.

 

[vxicepickxv]

Fully sided with EA on these issues.

And I'm calling shenanigans on the complainer.

("I swear to god I'm gonna pistol whip the next person that says shenanigans!")

Hey, what's that restaurant you always like to go to?

EULA's aren't legally binding. Because by the time you 'agree' to them, the transaction has already taken place. EULA's would only have any kind of legal standing if you had to read and agree to them before you actually handed money over for the game. Just because it tries to paint itself as a legal document, doesn't mean it is. I could make you sign a contract which declares your family and all your property to now belong to me. Doesn't mean it would stand up in a court of law. Indeed, any judge or lawyer would laugh me out of court.

Regardless of how the guy acted, no company has the right to this kind of over-reaching behaviour. The very fact that EA has the ability to lock you out of games you have legally purchased should make every gamer angry. It's tantamount to selling someone a car, then taking it back because you don't like their political allegience. But still keeping their money.

Their justifications for keeping this level of control are the very definition of flimsy: pirates are the people least affected by this, due to being able to crack the game, and the used market is still a legal market, despite how EA may try and demonize it. The only people this affects are their legal customers, and ultimately it is the legal customers who will be most hurt by this practise.

I remember reading about the EULA not being legal because of those terms, somewhere.

What EA is doing is nothing more than punishing their customers, who could very well not come back. I'm not sure the exact details of either lockout case, so I'm not going to say how wrong EA is about what they're doing. It seems they cleaned up their first case, and the second guy found out that sometimes you can't use the "Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory" without somebody who can do something(that seems dubious) actually responding.

The fact that legally purchased property is tied to an internet forum that might or might not be secure surely scares me. Depending on exactly how they deal with their criticism of these cases will depend on exactly how much EA stock I pick up. If either of these cases hits the main stream media, EA stock will take a nosedive because of the fear mongering and black eye.

 

[OutforEC]

Oh, nerdrage! Fight the power! Death to EA!

You know how ridiculous you sound raging against the machine? I think I even saw a bad car analogy up there somewhere. Now that all the pro-piracy crowd has gotten their two cents in trying to justify their lack of social mores, if you haven't figured it out yet the link in the original post basically takes at face value the words of random douchebag who had a vendetta against EA (btw, great journalism there Gaming Bolt; no wonder I've never heard of you). Unfortunately it seems the sentiment is widespread, and people just seem to lose all capacity for reason when it comes to big bad developer.

If you hate EA, hate on them for the right reasons, there are plenty out there. But don't hate on them because some douche whines about oppression.
If you pirate, be a man (or woman) about it and just pirate, stop trying to justify it to the rest of us.

And stay off my lawn!

 

[Danpascooch]

I declare shenanigans.
There is something more to this story unless I'm mistaken.
Gentlemen, get your brooms.

Last time they claimed it was a mistake, but now it's happened again.

 

[KaiRai]

EA - Helping Kim Jong Il control the internet and all who oppose.

Bloody idiots.

 

[Danpascooch]

Oh, nerdrage! Fight the power! Death to EA!

You know how ridiculous you sound raging against the machine? I think I even saw a bad car analogy up there somewhere. Now that all the pro-piracy crowd has gotten their two cents in trying to justify their lack of social mores, if you haven't figured it out yet the link in the original post basically takes at face value the words of random douchebag who had a vendetta against EA (btw, great journalism there Gaming Bolt; no wonder I've never heard of you). Unfortunately it seems the sentiment is widespread, and people just seem to lose all capacity for reason when it comes to big bad developer.

If you hate EA, hate on them for the right reasons, there are plenty out there. But don't hate on them because some douche whines about oppression.
If you pirate, be a man (or woman) about it and just pirate, stop trying to justify it to the rest of us.

And stay off my lawn!

Wait, so you're saying this never happened? That's what you're going with here?

Because EA admitted itself that this happened to another user a few days ago and that it was a mistake, so there goes your self delusions.

I hear you calling everyone douchebags and throwing vague insults, but nowhere do you state why being mad at a company for not letting you use a product you paid $60 for is a bad thing.

 

[OutforEC]

I hear you calling everyone douchebags and throwing vague insults, but nowhere do you state why being mad at a company for not letting you use a product you paid $60 for is a bad thing.

Likely because I know how to take responsibility for my actions, and therefore my actions don't include things that will get my toys taken away.

 

[jakefongloo]

I dunno what it is but something about this feels off.

Anyone minds doing a little bit of exploring? There is more to that story, and that guy knows it, maybe if actually used logic instead of his kidney as a brain, this wouldn't have happened.

I declare shenanigans.
There is something more to this story unless I'm mistaken.
Gentlemen, get your brooms.

This, there was hardly ANY information in this "report".

What were his posts?
Who reported him?
How many times has he been on the wire?

This a bit of shit slap-dash reporting. If you go one more step /make shit up\ then this turns into propoganda.

I didn't looke around THAT hard, but things like sources are at the end of the report 90%+ of the time. So if I'm really that blind someone help me out and tell me where it is.

 

[OutforEC]

The issue isnt this guy deserrving it, or w/e yes he was a dick, but this ability to effect my ability to use things I legaly paid for all becuase of a post, should not exist at all.

Multiple posts, repeated warnings, and likely done on purpose. Let's not be disingenuous about this, he probably had his 'complaint' written up before he was even banned.

 

[Zeraki]

I hope someone sues these fuckers, seriously. I don't care what it says in the contract, taking someone's money and then revoking their right to use what they legally paid for is theft, plain and simple. If they can't take a little hate and try to do this every time someone OH WAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH DOESN'T LIKE MY GAME WAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH, they're not going to be in this business too much longer. Eventually someone is going to point out that they're stealing from their customers, and they're going to get their asses handed to them in a court room (assuming the judge and jury aren't as corrupt as they are). Or someone could just bomb their offices, either way.

It's a shame, too, because I was starting to warm up to EA for a few months there. Apart from a few poor-taste marketing campaigns, they'd been publishing some decent games and weren't being colossal dicks. But now it appears that was just a brief fluke. Oh well, I guess I won't be giving them my business in the future.

I really wish people would actually start reading. It was already stated that he can play the game. The people who posted on that forum were telling him how to and he was ignoring them. All you have to do is make a new account and viola. He's just playing martyr so he can gain sympathy and have people attack EA and Bioware with knee-jerk reactions.

And it seems it is working.