Poll: Who is in the right here?

[Jitters Caffeine]

It's still his fault for breaking the ToS agreeing he agreed to knowing full well he could be banned from the forums, and subsiquently lose his EA account

That still doesn't make it not excessive.

If someone posted a bunch of nasty comments on Youtube and was banned (if only), it would be draconian to ban them from access to their associated Gmail account.

That doesn't really fit there. Being banned from Youtube isn't the same since you don't have anything connected through Youtube like you would your EA or Origin account. If Youtube was the medium through which your gmail was connected, then sure it'd make sense.

 

[OriginalLadders]

That doesn't really fit there. Being banned from Youtube isn't the same since you don't have anything connected through Youtube like you would your EA or Origin account. If Youtube was the medium through which your gmail was connected, then sure it'd make sense.

You have to have a Gmail account associated to a Youtube account now, you can't access Youtube (other than to watch videos) otherwise.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

Not to diminish your point there, but it wasn't a digital download. He had a physical copy

Don't worry, it doesn't . It's still a case of corporate butthurt leading to widespread denied access of his rightfully purchased product. In his case, it was "just" the online portion (though, as I understand it, that's 99% of the value for Battlefield and CoD-type games) as opposed to any access.

Still, it does reinforce my decision since, while EA may be the scummiest of the scumbags that everyone loves to hate, Valve's ToC give them the ability to do the exact same thing.

I'm glad it happened now, though. I mean, it sucks for this guy, but I'll admit, some of the sales on Steam lately have had me starting to reconsider.

I'm surprised no one has brought up Valve or Steam yet, since I've heard literal horror stories about people who have lost their accounts with them over something like this and lost over hundreds of games with no notification at all, and their ToS is WAY worse than EA's. I just think Valve/Steam is much more conscientious about the account ban punishment than others.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

That doesn't really fit there. Being banned from Youtube isn't the same since you don't have anything connected through Youtube like you would your EA or Origin account. If Youtube was the medium through which your gmail was connected, then sure it'd make sense.

You have to have a Gmail account associated to a Youtube account now, you can't access Youtube (other than to watch videos) otherwise.

I don't have one attached to my Youtube account, and I'm watching Youtube videos literally right now.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

I like that the guys pointing out the terms of service as well as what he said are more or less ignored by anti-EA drivel.

 

[OriginalLadders]

I don't have one attached to my Youtube account, and I'm watching Youtube videos literally right now.

I'll have to take you word for it, because about a year ago Youtube wouldn't let me log in until I had associated a Gmail account, and whenever I try disassociating them it won't let me log back in until I have a Gmail account associated with it.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

He shouldn?t get off scot free but they should not be locking you out of the stuff you bought because of comments on a forum. They should only be banning you from commenting on the forum.

He wasn't banned from playing the game, his EA account was banned. He had his gamertag attached to his EA account, which he subsiquently lost for getting his second harassment infraction.

 

[Bat Vader]

He paid for the games. Being an asshole shouldn't exempt him from playing.
Way to abuse your powers EA.

Did he deserve to be banned from the forums? Absolutely. They were right to ban him from the forums. I am on the fence about him being banned from playing online. If he was harassing people on the forums. He may have also been harassing people online as well. I am not saying he did just that he may have. If it does turn out he was harassing people online as well than I think him being banned from playing online was fully warranted.

Hopefully the guy learns his lesson and stops harassing people.

 

[Ruwrak]

'tough luck' we call it.

Shouldn't have been a jerk to begin with.
Allthough EA is a bit odd for banning him from all games.
And if this was an isolated happening on -forums- I see no reason why he should be banned from online play.

So noone is right, and everyone has a point.

 

[Sud0_x]

OP

You guys may be interested in the following old post of mine:

http://games.slashdot.org/story/08/10/31/004213/EA-Forum-Ban-Will-Now-Mean-EA-Game-Ban
It seems this isn't the first time this sort of thing has come up, apparently it was a "mistake" and the "...information was incorrect" 3 years ago too.

This is in regards to an EA forum ban resulting in an EA community ban and locking people out of games.
Funny how this sort of "glitch" has just come to their attention after they denied it happening in the first place.

Unfortunately the original posts by EA staff have since been removed, it's still a bold faced lie. Nothing but damage control. Again.

Edit: Please take note, the article is dated 2008
Second edit: This article is EVEN BETTER [link]http://www.shacknews.com/article/55656/ea-not-banning-game-access[/link]


And within this article (also from 2008): http://www.shacknews.com/article/55647/ea-threatens-game-bans-for

"To reiterate my previous stance, I certainly sympathize with the plight of those that have been tasked with watching over a game's official forums. But I really can't believe that EA has allowed this to pop up once again." [Chris Faylor, 2008]

It is suggested that this type of thing had happened prior.

I dunno it's a tough one to call... are they really this bad at lying or are they truly that incompetent?

The escapist's own Andy Chalk has covered this at least twice in the past

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/87102-EA-Get-Banned-From-Forums-Lose-Your-Games
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.269975-No-Dragon-Age-2-for-Suspended-BioWare-Forumite-UPDATED

Seriously, guys, we shouldn't be surprised about these things.
Yes, I am of the opinion that this business is complete bullshit.
Edited for broken links.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

'tough luck' we call it.

Shouldn't have been a jerk to begin with.
Allthough EA is a bit odd for banning him from all games.
And if this was an isolated happening on -forums- I see no reason why he should be banned from online play.

So noone is right, and everyone has a point.

They DIDN'T ban him from his games. They banned his EA account which he had connected to his gamertag, which in turn got him locked out of the online content of his games. He can still play them, just not access the online.

 

[Stu35]

This is a very simple issue for me.

He paid for a product, with a service. EA have an obligation either to allow him to use that service, or offer him a full refund.

Banning someone from Forums is not the same as banning them from a product they have paid for.

Overall I'm getting rather concerned by the business practices of some of the wealthier companies in the gaming Industry. As much as I believe in the capitalist ideal that everyone has the right to make money, and it is the consumers job to regulate that by not buying into corporations which abuse their position, the games industry does not appear to follow that trend, and people continue to buy products year on year which strengthen the position of companies, who are in turn given no reason to act in an ethical manner.

The only reason any company has for acting in such a way is either for profits, tax-breaks, or to come into line with national laws - the Gaming Industry is not offered any incentives by any of these three to act ethically - their profits remain unharmed despite their treatment of customers. They receive no grants or breaks from governments for any ethical decisions they take regarding their customers, and the law is generally on their side whenever they choose to stomp out something they don't like.

C'est la vie.

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

This is a very simple issue for me.

He paid for a product, with a service. EA have an obligation either to allow him to use that service, or offer him a full refund.

Banning someone from Forums is not the same as banning them from a product they have paid for.

Overall I'm getting rather concerned by the business practices of some of the wealthier companies in the gaming Industry. As much as I believe in the capitalist ideal that everyone has the right to make money, and it is the consumers job to regulate that by not buying into corporations which abuse their position, the games industry does not appear to follow that trend, and people continue to buy products year on year which strengthen the position of companies, who are in turn given no reason to act in an ethical manner.

The only reason any company has for acting in such a way is either for profits, tax-breaks, or to come into line with national laws - the Gaming Industry is not offered any incentives by any of these three to act ethically - their profits remain unharmed despite their treatment of customers. They receive no grants or breaks from governments for any ethical decisions they take regarding their customers, and the law is generally on their side whenever they choose to stomp out something they don't like.

C'est la vie.

I think you're kind of missing the fact he CAN still play his games. He just no longer has access to the online functions of the games. It's not like EA called up Microsoft to lock his Xbox out of playing all of their past and future titles just to stick it to the guy for being an asshole on their forums, or they sent a guy over to his house to break all of the copies of EA titles he owns. He simply had his gamertag connected to his EA account and was banned for his SECOND harassment complaint. He broke the rules he agreed to, whether he read them or not he's still responsible for his actions and all the consequences they entail.

 

[Kemea]

The ban for battlefield seems fair but to ban for all the other games is a bit too far...

 

[Ruwrak]

'tough luck' we call it.

Shouldn't have been a jerk to begin with.
Allthough EA is a bit odd for banning him from all games.
And if this was an isolated happening on -forums- I see no reason why he should be banned from online play.

So noone is right, and everyone has a point.

They DIDN'T ban him from his games. They banned his EA account which he had connected to his gamertag, which in turn got him locked out of the online content of his games. He can still play them, just not access the online.

Yeah, in other words, they banned him from the games. From the parts they can ban him from though. Might not have been fully clear on that, didn't expected I needed to clarify.

 

[The Funslinger]

That's what you get for being an EA customer, these days. Even though he was wrong to troll forums, his game account should be protected. He should have lost just his forums rights.

But, I'm EA free for 4 years now. One day at a time.

Do you have the little golden rehab disc?

 

[Jitters Caffeine]

'tough luck' we call it.

Shouldn't have been a jerk to begin with.
Allthough EA is a bit odd for banning him from all games.
And if this was an isolated happening on -forums- I see no reason why he should be banned from online play.

So noone is right, and everyone has a point.

They DIDN'T ban him from his games. They banned his EA account which he had connected to his gamertag, which in turn got him locked out of the online content of his games. He can still play them, just not access the online.

Yeah, in other words, they banned him from the games. From the parts they can ban him from though. Might not have been fully clear on that, didn't expected I needed to clarify.

They are LITERALLY not the same thing.

 

[Rin Little]

Wow... that all sounds really stupid on EA's part. Ban him from the forums ok, but banning him from playing a game that he paid for? That's asking for a huge problem to arise from it, whether its in the User Agreement or not.

 

[Ruwrak]

'tough luck' we call it.

Shouldn't have been a jerk to begin with.
Allthough EA is a bit odd for banning him from all games.
And if this was an isolated happening on -forums- I see no reason why he should be banned from online play.

So noone is right, and everyone has a point.

They DIDN'T ban him from his games. They banned his EA account which he had connected to his gamertag, which in turn got him locked out of the online content of his games. He can still play them, just not access the online.

Yeah, in other words, they banned him from the games. From the parts they can ban him from though. Might not have been fully clear on that, didn't expected I needed to clarify.

They are LITERALLY not the same thing.

Tomatoes or Tomátoes.
Beeing banned from a game implies that you're banned from the online part, merely by the word 'banned' since it's assoiciated with online segments of any game.

But why are we arguing. We both know what everyone means :V

 

[Sud0_x]

This is a very simple issue for me.

He paid for a product, with a service. EA have an obligation either to allow him to use that service, or offer him a full refund.

Banning someone from Forums is not the same as banning them from a product they have paid for.

Overall I'm getting rather concerned by the business practices of some of the wealthier companies in the gaming Industry. As much as I believe in the capitalist ideal that everyone has the right to make money, and it is the consumers job to regulate that by not buying into corporations which abuse their position, the games industry does not appear to follow that trend, and people continue to buy products year on year which strengthen the position of companies, who are in turn given no reason to act in an ethical manner.

The only reason any company has for acting in such a way is either for profits, tax-breaks, or to come into line with national laws - the Gaming Industry is not offered any incentives by any of these three to act ethically - their profits remain unharmed despite their treatment of customers. They receive no grants or breaks from governments for any ethical decisions they take regarding their customers, and the law is generally on their side whenever they choose to stomp out something they don't like.

C'est la vie.

I think you're kind of missing the fact he CAN still play his games. He just no longer has access to the online functions of the games. It's not like EA called up Microsoft to lock his Xbox out of playing all of their past and future titles just to stick it to the guy for being an asshole on their forums, or they sent a guy over to his house to break all of the copies of EA titles he owns. He simply had his gamertag connected to his EA account and was banned for his SECOND harassment complaint. He broke the rules he agreed to, whether he read them or not he's still responsible for his actions and all the consequences they entail.

Uh.. Yeah... But it's not as simple as locking him out of some online multiplayer (Which is still an issue in itself).
Any DLC connected to that account? Gone.
Say what you want about T&C; it's still unethical and I'm sure it violates consumer rights laws in some countries.
Don't ignore my earlier post either, EA have done this for years and still lie about it to this day.

^clicky^