EA just approved my refund for SimCity

[BeerTent]

pretty interesting, i thought by now they would've cut off customer support with some bullshit "cap limit" for refunds or something.

still, broken game is broken, glad you got your refund, you can join us awesome pleb's in simcity 4

Haha I went the same route and bought Simcity 4 during the Simcity shitstorm. Some escapists should use dropbox or whatever it's called and start a region together. That'd be pretty neat.

I tried to use another Sync program between two people in SC4. While it was usable, there were still a lot of inconsistencies. Far more when the two players tried to play at the same time. I'd try it if you want between a few people. (Can easily be done with junction folders too... Just get on a modern OS to use them) but get ready to be underwhelmed. Sadly, SC4 just isn't built to have it's save files modified while you play it.

 

[Abomination]

Actually EA did provide customer service by giving a refund. It is in their policy (and Valves for Steam and most other online businesses) that they do not often give back refunds. It's a bad policy but it is also a legal one as by signing up to Origin or Steam you accept the terms and conditions of using the product. They showed by giving back a refund that they cared about their customer.

This is terribly, terribly incorrect. The fair trade and consumer laws in New Zealand and Australia can NOT be signed away. They take precedence over any EULA or Terms of Service you might agree to, in fact those very EULA and ToS are ILLEGAL in ANZ. "No refunds" works in the United States because the US has terrible consumer laws. It does not work for ANZ because "No refunds" is illegal in those nations.

People get congratulated all the time for not breaking the law. Calling an ambulance for someone having a drug overdose or some form of life threatening injury is generally considered a good thing and people often congratulate people for not allowing a person to die and thus being a liability for the persons death. I got congratulated for returning a woman's purse and was given the money in the wallet as a reward, I could have gotten the same money if I kept the wallet but I decided not to break the law. There's a ton of things people get thanked/congratulated for in terms of not breaking the law.

There's a significant difference in those scenarios because in many cases people would do those things WITHOUT needing the law to tell them to do so. We know very well that EA gave this discount because they were obligated to do so, not out of the kindness of their heart.

is that 2 dollars on top of the cost of making a phone call as well? Or is that all together?

Actually I was wrong, it was $2+ per MINUTE on the phone call which costs more than an international phone call from Australia on a regular domestic line. It is simply an intentional barrier to any claims process that they are REQUIRED by Australian law to have. Typical corporate bullying tactics of consumers and it's an example as to how terrible the culture of their customer service is.

 

[likalaruku]

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

You're part of the problem with how much of a failure that award system is.

 

[ResonanceSD]

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

You're part of the problem with how much of a failure that award system is.

Happy to help. EA doing badly in a poll for consumers isn't a bad thing. The fact that BoA is even in the poll to begin with is nuts.

 

[bug_of_war]

This is terribly, terribly incorrect. The fair trade and consumer laws in New Zealand and Australia can NOT be signed away. They take precedence over any EULA or Terms of Service you might agree to, in fact those very EULA and ToS are ILLEGAL in ANZ. "No refunds" works in the United States because the US has terrible consumer laws. It does not work for ANZ because "No refunds" is illegal in those nations.

Yeah it's illegal in ANZ, but EA is an American company, and as you pointed out, America has terrible consumer laws. Using Origin, an American product, and agreeing to their terms and conditions doesn't that technically mean we are agreeing to the terrible terms and conditions, regardless of the fact that we live in a country that forbids such actions for taking place?

There's a significant difference in those scenarios because in many cases people would do those things WITHOUT needing the law to tell them to do so. We know very well that EA gave this discount because they were obligated to do so, not out of the kindness of their heart.

Yes and no. Yes there's a difference between life and death, but not the wallet scenario. As for most people doing the right thing...I'm gonna have to sit on the fence. I know lots of places in the State I live in where in which you make sure you don't loose shit, because if you do you aint never going to get it back. Believe it or not there are still people whom have no morals, and while I returned the wallet due to believing it be the right thing to do there are people whom would not have done so, or would have returned the money but skimmed the cash out of the wallet and pretend that that's how thy found it.

Actually I was wrong, it was $2+ per MINUTE on the phone call which costs more than an international phone call from Australia on a regular domestic line. It is simply an intentional barrier to any claims process that they are REQUIRED by Australian law to have. Typical corporate bullying tactics of consumers and it's an example as to how terrible the culture of their customer service is.

Wow, that really is lame.

 

[Loonyyy]

This is terribly, terribly incorrect. The fair trade and consumer laws in New Zealand and Australia can NOT be signed away. They take precedence over any EULA or Terms of Service you might agree to, in fact those very EULA and ToS are ILLEGAL in ANZ. "No refunds" works in the United States because the US has terrible consumer laws. It does not work for ANZ because "No refunds" is illegal in those nations.

Yeah it's illegal in ANZ, but EA is an American company, and as you pointed out, America has terrible consumer laws. Using Origin, an American product, and agreeing to their terms and conditions doesn't that technically mean we are agreeing to the terrible terms and conditions, regardless of the fact that we live in a country that forbids such actions for taking place?

No. To do business in a country means abiding by that nations laws, I'm pretty sure. EA doesn't get to carry the US jurisdiction over, they've come into the ANZ court, and they play by those rules. Otherwise they get sued under Australian or New Zealand Law.

Actually I was wrong, it was $2+ per MINUTE on the phone call which costs more than an international phone call from Australia on a regular domestic line. It is simply an intentional barrier to any claims process that they are REQUIRED by Australian law to have. Typical corporate bullying tactics of consumers and it's an example as to how terrible the culture of their customer service is.

Wow, that really is lame.

Worst part is, you rarely get through. It's a charged support line, which also has a queue, which also disconnects you every 5 minutes if you don't reach the head of the queue.

 

[bug_of_war]

Dragon Age 2

Westwood

Maxis of Sim City 2000

Online passes

"From Ashes"

Their Dante's Inferno marketing

What they did to dead space

The shit that is Battlefield that comes out like an annual cancer on gaming

^ the fact that the shit is so popular amongst console frat boys that the entire industry felt the need to emulate it.

Dragon Age 2 is not a bad game. It has some problems such as the re-using of environments, but fundamentally it is a perfectly fine and functional game that could have been better had EA not cut development time.

EA is not the only company doing online passes, and as far as I am aware their online passes are only required for unlocking their multiplayer, which is far better than lets say...Arkham City, where an entire campaign was cut from the game so as that people whom buy it used get screwed over and have to pay more for content that should have been all included.

The From Ashes DLC had begun development after the main campaign had been completed. When announced for release the price for Mass Effect the main campaign and multiplayer added up to $90. This is what everyone agreed apon for that content. Then, they realised they had enough time to begin working on DLC, thus instead of paying people to sit around and jack off EA paid Bioware to make DLC. By the time the game had to be in stores the DLC was complete and ready to be released. Playing Mass Effect 3 without From Ashes is fine, I did and did not feel as though there was missing content. Playing with From Ashes made me feel like the DLC I bought was worth it as it added to my base experience.

Dead Space is still a decent video game series. It's no longer horror, but really the first game lost most of it's horror elements after chapter 4. Micro-transactions are entirely up to you, and you can go through the game just fine without them.

And who cares if Battlefield is a popular game? Honestly it is a good game and I don't see why people on this site seem to vomit profusely when a military shooter is released. The FPS genre is extremely popular so of course there are going to be more FPS games. Battlefield 3 was excellent, and until Battlefield 4 comes out we can only speculate. And it's not just console frat boys who play Battlefield.

 

[bug_of_war]

No. To do business in a country means abiding by that nations laws, I'm pretty sure. EA doesn't get to carry the US jurisdiction over, they've come into the ANZ court, and they play by those rules. Otherwise they get sued under Australian or New Zealand Law.

Thank you, I was not aware of this.

]

Worst part is, you rarely get through. It's a charged support line, which also has a queue, which also disconnects you every 5 minutes if you don't reach the head of the queue.

I personally have never had to use their support line, so I was also not aware of this.

 

[Abomination]

This is terribly, terribly incorrect. The fair trade and consumer laws in New Zealand and Australia can NOT be signed away. They take precedence over any EULA or Terms of Service you might agree to, in fact those very EULA and ToS are ILLEGAL in ANZ. "No refunds" works in the United States because the US has terrible consumer laws. It does not work for ANZ because "No refunds" is illegal in those nations.

Yeah it's illegal in ANZ, but EA is an American company, and as you pointed out, America has terrible consumer laws. Using Origin, an American product, and agreeing to their terms and conditions doesn't that technically mean we are agreeing to the terrible terms and conditions, regardless of the fact that we live in a country that forbids such actions for taking place?

No. Believe it or not but the ANZ governments are not strangers to how international business operates and have their own share of multi-billion dollar companies. If you sell your product in ANZ then your company must adhere to ANZ commercial law.

There's a significant difference in those scenarios because in many cases people would do those things WITHOUT needing the law to tell them to do so. We know very well that EA gave this discount because they were obligated to do so, not out of the kindness of their heart.

Yes and no. Yes there's a difference between life and death, but not the wallet scenario. As for most people doing the right thing...I'm gonna have to sit on the fence. I know lots of places in the State I live in where in which you make sure you don't loose shit, because if you do you aint never going to get it back. Believe it or not there are still people whom have no morals, and while I returned the wallet due to believing it be the right thing to do there are people whom would not have done so, or would have returned the money but skimmed the cash out of the wallet and pretend that that's how thy found it.

Those are scenarios where someone should know better than to lose their money. I mean, just because you lost it doesn't mean someone will find it. If I find money, even though it is "illegal" I will keep it for myself because if not me then someone else. We are talking about broken promises and an actual duty of care. Breach of contract. An agreement between a person and a company. "I agree to pay you $XX and you agree to give me a product/service that functions as you say it should." If I don't give them the money and I somehow obtain the product I am breaking the law. If I do give them the money and they give me a product that does not work as advertised that is also breaking the law. What's more it's a breach of trust between both parties.

Me finding someone's wallet is different because I never told that individual "If I find your wallet I will return it to you." and they never gave me compensation before hand for that service I promised to provide them. Since there is no duty of care I am considered a good person for returning it to them if I was to do so because I was not OBLIGATED to do so. That is going above and beyond. That is customer service. Doing more than you are legally obliged to do.

Actually I was wrong, it was $2+ per MINUTE on the phone call which costs more than an international phone call from Australia on a regular domestic line. It is simply an intentional barrier to any claims process that they are REQUIRED by Australian law to have. Typical corporate bullying tactics of consumers and it's an example as to how terrible the culture of their customer service is.

Wow, that really is lame.

It isn't just a one-off thing either. That is EA's customer service culture. "We will deal with you if we HAVE to." Not "We will help you because we WANT to."

 

[ResonanceSD]

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

You're part of the problem with how much of a failure that award system is.

Happy to help. EA doing badly in a poll for consumers isn't a bad thing. The fact that BoA is even in the poll to begin with is nuts.

Well BoA was one of the culprits behind the global recession.

Dude I live in Australia. What recession?

 

[ResonanceSD]

Me finding someone's wallet is different because I never told that individual "If I find your wallet I will return it to you." and they never gave me compensation before hand for that service I promised to provide them. Since there is no duty of care I am considered a good person for returning it to them if I was to do so because I was not OBLIGATED to do so. That is going above and beyond. That is customer service. Doing more than you are legally obliged to do.

Not making an effort to return it is a crime, "larceny by finding"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding

 

[Abomination]

Me finding someone's wallet is different because I never told that individual "If I find your wallet I will return it to you." and they never gave me compensation before hand for that service I promised to provide them. Since there is no duty of care I am considered a good person for returning it to them if I was to do so because I was not OBLIGATED to do so. That is going above and beyond. That is customer service. Doing more than you are legally obliged to do.

Not making an effort to return it is a crime, "larceny by finding"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft_by_finding

Yet you will find it to be seldom enforced or next to no effort put towards such "crimes" due to just how absurd it can be.

Certainly it's a crime not to but being honest with ourselves it's there to ping people who "find" incredibly valuable and important items knowing who the owner is and not returning it.

 

[KeyMaster45]

While I agree that sometimes the customer is'nt always right and that some of them are dicks(trust I've had a few who I wanted to kick in the face)I don't think it's good business to be dicks towards all your customers.As for the consumerist poll it really does'nt matter but I question people's priorities when they vote a game company over companies that robbed people of their life savings or killed people and the enviroment because of their practices.But I'm not going to insult or berate them because like I said it's pointless and that energy is better served elsewhere.

But that's the thing, this guy got his money back and yet still goes on to bash EA. Okay, yes they have done some questionable things recently, but in this individual case they have done everything right towards the consumer and the consumer is acting like a massive jackass. Should I really be wasting my energy getting so mad at 1 persons opinion...I don't know. On one hand I am on a website where in which a majority of people have a death wish for EA, but at the same time I see people wasting energy yelling at EA on a forum that EA likely never visits.

One good deed does not erase a history of sins.

Look at it from his perspective, yeah he got his money back but he had to spend what was no doubt a significant amount of valuable time to do. Valuable time that he would not have had to waste had EA's standard method of business not lead to the games unsatisfactory state of functionality; be that directly or indirectly. How many times has the OP been burned by EA? How many times has his attempts at customer service been fruitless?

The OP was helped successfully, once. To then go and express how poor a company to do business with EA is, is perfectly reasonable. Let's look at a somewhat similar situation to make my point more clear.

You go to the movies and while you're there you find that the theaters are poorly maintained, the bathrooms filthy, the projector simply will not function correctly, and that all their popcorn is stale. Dissatisfied you walk out of the movie and ask for a refund. The staff and subsequent managers that you speak with are all very polite and apologetic, and in the end you are given a full refund.

Are you going to leave the theater and then recommend it to your friends, or are you going to tell them what an awful experience you had and to instead try another one? Customer service is triage. By the time the customer reaches that point, all hope of making a good impression on them has gone out the window. If you still recommend that theater, despite it's awful condition, based solely on that you got a refund after you had a bad experience, then you my friend are insane.

 

[bug_of_war]

No. Believe it or not but the ANZ governments are not strangers to how international business operates and have their own share of multi-billion dollar companies. If you sell your product in ANZ then your company must adhere to ANZ commercial law.

Another user pointed that out to me. I was unaware of that. Then I wonder why it takes ages to get refunds from Origin and Steam...I am legitimately curious.

There's a significant difference in those scenarios because in many cases people would do those things WITHOUT needing the law to tell them to do so. We know very well that EA gave this discount because they were obligated to do so, not out of the kindness of their heart.

Those are scenarios where someone should know better than to lose their money. I mean, just because you lost it doesn't mean someone will find it. If I find money, even though it is "illegal" I will keep it for myself because if not me then someone else. We are talking about broken promises and an actual duty of care. Breach of contract. An agreement between a person and a company. "I agree to pay you $XX and you agree to give me a product/service that functions as you say it should." If I don't give them the money and I somehow obtain the product I am breaking the law. If I do give them the money and they give me a product that does not work as advertised that is also breaking the law. What's more it's a breach of trust between both parties.

Me finding someone's wallet is different because I never told that individual "If I find your wallet I will return it to you." and they never gave me compensation before hand for that service I promised to provide them. Since there is no duty of care I am considered a good person for returning it to them if I was to do so because I was not OBLIGATED to do so. That is going above and beyond. That is customer service. Doing more than you are legally obliged to do.

Let me clarify, I never said that lost money would be returned to the owner, what I meant that if I lost my wallet, or something that I had my own ID with my address and or phone number in it, in certain areas in my state, I would not expect to get it back or even here about it being found. As for Sim City the Consumer Distributer Agreement is, "I the consumer give you money for the product you have advertised" if you are unhappy with the product or if it has flaws it is up to the distributer to replace the product, fix the problems, or issue a refund. EA issued a refund, and whilst I'm not saying we should give them a pat on the back and a gold medal, I am saying that we should in return show them the decency of walking away with our money and not flipping them off. As you said, they upheld their end of the bargain and followed the rules, so why bust their balls over it?

It isn't just a one-off thing either. That is EA's customer service culture. "We will deal with you if we HAVE to." Not "We will help you because we WANT to."

I was never aware of this for a few reasons. 1) I have never had any of my games/products from EA screw up on me, thus personally I have never had to use the customer service myself. 2) I have had friends whom have had to contact EA in the past whom all have said that their issues were sorted out quickly and without any hassle. 3) There have been instances of people on these forums and others where in which EA has copped blame for something that it has never done or was not it's fault, thus I take everything I see with a grain of sand and do not immediately believe it.

I'm not saying you're wrong, a few people have backed up your statement on the customer service issue (and there was that one picture someone linked), I just prefer to make sure it isn't someone making up stories to make EA look worse.

 

[Supertegwyn]

So I was super excited to get the new SimCity, I even posted about it here.

However, after a few weeks of giving EA the benefit of the doubt, even my magnificence can be proved completely wrong.

Broken utilities, pathing issues (and given the reliance of the entire fucking game on pathing), poor communication and the beyond ridiculous Nissan Leaf DLC, I applied for, and got a refund.

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

Oh grow up! You get yourself excited for a game, and you get let down. Fine. Deal with it.

You got a refund, be happy. Don't make some childish vote because the game wasn't perfect the first time. If you do that with EA, and not with say Bethesda, then you are a hypocrite.

 

[bug_of_war]

One good deed does not erase a history of sins.

Look at it from his perspective, yeah he got his money back but he had to spend what was no doubt a significant amount of valuable time to do. Valuable time that he would not have had to waste had EA's standard method of business not lead to the games unsatisfactory state of functionality; be that directly or indirectly. How many times has the OP been burned by EA? How many times has his attempts at customer service been fruitless?

The OP was helped successfully, once. To then go and express how poor a company to do business with EA is, is perfectly reasonable. Let's look at a somewhat similar situation to make my point more clear.

No, one good deed cannot erase a history of sins, but it can be the start of a turn around. As for valuable time, I agree, it can be a pain in the ass, I should know because I was screwed around by Valve for 6 weeks trying to get a refund for a game that would literally not open even to the main menu. I get that it's a pain in the ass and time consuming, but in the end he got his money back. That should give some brownie points. And as for EA's latest bad moves, the only 2 that I can think of is this one and Dragon Age 2 (Which is still a game that functions perfectly fine, but could use more content). Other than those 2 I've never really seen any reason to hate on EA.

You go to the movies and while you're there you find that the theaters are poorly maintained, the bathrooms filthy, the projector simply will not function correctly, and that all their popcorn is stale. Dissatisfied you walk out of the movie and ask for a refund. The staff and subsequent managers that you speak with are all very polite and apologetic, and in the end you are given a full refund.

Are you going to leave the theater and then recommend it to your friends, or are you going to tell them what an awful experience you had and to instead try another one? Customer service is triage. By the time the customer reaches that point, all hope of making a good impression on them has gone out the window. If you still recommend that theater, despite it's awful condition, based solely on that you got a refund after you had a bad experience, then you my friend are insane.

No I wouldn't recommend it to my friends, but I would say, "While the popcorn sucked, the theatre was poor, (public bathrooms are always filthy IMO, and at a cinema I'm not exactly going to spend time in their toilets so...) and the projector didn't function well, the staff were really good and at least I got my money back". That doesn't make the cinema better, but if I got really polite staff whom were kind and helped me get my money back I would not go out of my way to bad mouth the whole cinema. I got my money back, I can always go to a better cinema to see the movie again or a new one. Instead of expending energy on a bad experience I would move forward.

 

[Abomination]

I'm not saying you're wrong, a few people have backed up your statement on the customer service issue (and there was that one picture someone linked), I just prefer to make sure it isn't someone making up stories to make EA look worse.

You do not earn the reputation EA has earned by making a "few" mistakes.

I think the primary example is the +$2/minute for calling their helpdesk. That's the customer service culture.

Perhaps they're starting to slowly turn over a new leaf - if so good on them, maybe the new CEO will slam some heads together. I mean, the only way to go is up.

EA has made some great games. I have honestly enjoyed Mass Effect III and Dead Space III and felt I got my money's worth.

I did not enjoy SimCity but I took the free Dead Space III they gave me and am satisfied paying as much as I did for SimCity to get those games. So if I feel I got what I paid for I am happy. At the same time I despite their customer service and the path they are continuing to travel down.

 

[ResonanceSD]

So I was super excited to get the new SimCity, I even posted about it here.

However, after a few weeks of giving EA the benefit of the doubt, even my magnificence can be proved completely wrong.

Broken utilities, pathing issues (and given the reliance of the entire fucking game on pathing), poor communication and the beyond ridiculous Nissan Leaf DLC, I applied for, and got a refund.

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

So giving you a refund isn't pretending to give a shit?

No, that's following the law, if they did not comply with the law in this country, then the government fines them for more than my $80.

And then they refund me.

 

[ResonanceSD]

So I was super excited to get the new SimCity, I even posted about it here.

However, after a few weeks of giving EA the benefit of the doubt, even my magnificence can be proved completely wrong.

Broken utilities, pathing issues (and given the reliance of the entire fucking game on pathing), poor communication and the beyond ridiculous Nissan Leaf DLC, I applied for, and got a refund.

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

So giving you a refund isn't pretending to give a shit?

No, that's following the law, if they did not comply with the law in this country, then the government fines them for more than my $80.

And then they refund me.

By the way, I love how you blame EA for a shit game instead of Maxis haha.

yeah it's not like EA completely own Maxis or anything. Nope, not at all.

 

[Abomination]

So I was super excited to get the new SimCity, I even posted about it here.

However, after a few weeks of giving EA the benefit of the doubt, even my magnificence can be proved completely wrong.

Broken utilities, pathing issues (and given the reliance of the entire fucking game on pathing), poor communication and the beyond ridiculous Nissan Leaf DLC, I applied for, and got a refund.

And I'll happily be voting for EA in the "worst company evar" poll. Because unlike Bank of America, EA will at least pretend to give a shit about it.

So giving you a refund isn't pretending to give a shit?

No, that's following the law, if they did not comply with the law in this country, then the government fines them for more than my $80.

And then they refund me.

By the way, I love how you blame EA for a shit game instead of Maxis haha.

yeah it's not like EA completely own Maxis or anything. Nope, not at all.

Yeah, and they completely own a lot of companies but it's common practice for when someone likes an EA game to praise the developer and when someone hates an EA game they fault the publisher.

When the games are failing for decisions that EA makes then you blame EA for the game failing. When a game does well for decisions the developer makes you praise the developer for the game doing well.

Maxis saying it was their idea to go "fully online" is a statement made under duress. You would be mad to think a member of Maxis would say "EA told us to do this so we did this" and expect to keep their job.