Falcon123 said:
V da Mighty Taco said:
dragongit said:
Please enjoy your always on DRM, and micro transactions. Leader boards and other minor services will be released as future DLC. A functioning game will be released as an expansion: It wont be a new game, it'll just work.
Seriously, I just read that they are blocking people who ask for refunds and other stupid crap. I'm surprised if EA still had legs, I've lost count on how many times they've shot their own feet.
Falcon123 said:
So, no word yet on how they justify threatening to ban people's accounts for trying to claim the refund EA offered? Awesome. I'm so glad EA are such good guys like CliffyB said. Otherwise, everyone involved in this wreck would look REALLY dumb and at least a little evil...
Sean Strife said:
dragongit said:
Please enjoy your always on DRM, and micro transactions. Leader boards and other minor services will be released as future DLC. A functioning game will be released as an expansion: It wont be a new game, it'll just work.
Seriously, I just read that they are blocking people who ask for refunds and other stupid crap. I'm surprised if EA still had legs, I've lost count on how many times they've shot their own feet.
*Image snipped to save space*
You mean stuff like this?
Hate to burst your bubbles, but that was already proven false. This very site already has at least two articles about that being disproved. As much as I like seeing EA getting flak, I'd prefer it if we did so with accurate info.
2 Things:
1. Look at the time stamp on my post. The articles "proving" it to be false came out AFTER I posted. To judge me for not using information that was not available to me seems patently unfair.
2. Read that text again. He only threatens to cancel the purchase AFTER they tell him they won't execute the refund. Yes, when he said that, the rest of the conversation became null and void. But if they had just agreed to do what they promised, he never would have made the threat. So...yeah, it's still pretty accurate as far as I can tell
I'll admit, I did not check the timestamps and do apologize for that.
From what I've been hearing though, that entire conversation is a fabrication. Let's assume though that it is the real deal and look at what we do know:
- Most online distributors have in their terms of services the whole "no refunds" clause, most notable being Origin and Steam. Even Valve refuses refunds the majority of the time.
- The whole chargeback thing is grounds for banning on most of these online distribution services as well, due to the very serious nature of chargebacks. A lot of people (I am
not saying you) do not fully understand just how big a deal chargbacks actually are and that they are meant to be an absolute last resort for when one is completely done with a company.
- SimCity is a now a multiplayer-focused game that sells for $60 and has always-on DRM, with the latter being infamous for causing massive technical issues in many games.
- Games that require some sort of server-side authentication typically have widespread playability issues during at least the first week of a games launch.
- SimCity has EA as it's publisher. That alone says a lot.
What does this all actually mean? First off, that everyone who agreed to that ToS agreed to the whole "no refund" rule. While some nations out there do have laws protecting people from that kind of crap, the U.S. and numerous other countries do not. In other words, if your country does not have a law like that in place, then you either need to not accept horrendous terms like that and do the whole "vote with your wallet" crap or push the government to make those laws. Otherwise, companies such as EA ends up being able to legally get away with this crap as much as they like. Second, that chargebacks typically will get you banned from just about anywhere, even retail from my understanding. Chargebacks are seen as a final "I am done with you once and for all, give me back my money or this goes to court", and thus it should not be taken lightly at all. Third, people need to stop buying games that have some sort of always-online requirement, especially during the launch week, as massive technical issues are far too common on these type of games. Fourth, anything that's published by EA should at least encourage people to exercise caution when deciding whether or not to buy the game, as EA is notorious for screwing people over in the name of profits.
In other words, the always-online game being published by the arguably second most-despised publisher in the business (behind Zynga) should have had raised enough red flags to be mistakeable as a Chinese invasion. Getting the game day-1 should not have been seen as a viable option, all things considered. While this absolutely does not excuse EA in the slightest for this bullshit, they do have the right to refuse refunds in many countries due to that pesky ToS and thus until adequate laws are in place to stop this crap, people need to exercise extreme caution when buying products from them or anyone else who puts this "no refund" clause into their ToS - doubly so when it's a full-priced $60 game and exponentially more so when always-online is involved. As Ackbar would say...
