Angry PS3 Gamers Sue EA Over Broken Battlefield Promise

[GameWinner]

Prior to the launch of Battlefield 3, Electronic Arts made a pretty sweet offer to PlayStation 3 owners: buy the game and get a free copy of Battlefield 1943. It's a couple years old but still a very solid game and it's hard to complain about two games for the price of one. But when the big day came, BF1943 was nowhere to be found; instead of the game, EA said it would offer the PS3 crowd early access to DLC. Not to give any of it to them, mind, but just the opportunity to spend their money on it ahead of everyone else. Adding insult to injury, EA had already announced that Battlefield 3 expansions would be timed exclusives on the PS3, making the "in lieu of" offer meaningless. Instead of a "bait and switch," it was a "bait and screw you."
Surprise, surprise, EA is now facing a class action lawsuit over the whole mess and while at first glance it might look like just spoiled gamers demanding stuff they didn't pay for anyway, there's actually a more serious justification for the suit. The complaint isn't so much that EA changed its mind on the offer, but when and how it did so. Nothing was said until after the game was released and the announcement, when it finally came, was only made on Twitter, meaning that those who didn't follow EA and/or DICE were never informed of the situation. EA's backup offer, which was in fact not a substitute deal at all, is also noted.
In other words, EA "misled and profited from thousands of their customers by making a promise that they could not, and never intended, to keep," according to the suit. A potentially large number of customers based their purchasing decision on a very specific offer which was ultimately rescinded - but not until it was too late for that decision to be undone.
The suit seeks the usual "compensatory relief" and all that sort of thing but the lawyers claim that in practical terms, all they really want is that which was promised in the first place: free copies of Battlefield 1943. We'll see how that works out.

http://www.escapistm...lefield-Promise
Resolved: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/11/25/ea-giving-battlefield-1943-vouchers-to-ps3-battlefield-3-owners/

 

[Valwin]

why would they want BF 1943 the game is a joke comparing it it to the original

 

[KingVamp]

Not sure, but I think this is already been resolved and the gamers won.

 

[AceWarhead]

why would they want BF 1943 the game is a joke comparing it it to the original

That's not the point. The point is EA lied and gypped the people of BF 1943.

 

[Valwin]

why would they want BF 1943 the game is a joke comparing it it to the original

That's not the point. The point is EA lied and gypped the people of BF 1943.

well EA should deliver if they say they were going to do it

 

[Ryupower]

they are doing to

EA giving Battlefield 1943 vouchers to PS3 Battlefield 3 owners

https://1943redempti...d.com/index.php

 

[AceWarhead]

why would they want BF 1943 the game is a joke comparing it it to the original

That's not the point. The point is EA lied and gypped the people of BF 1943.

well EA should deliver if they say they were going to do it

Well, they should, as they just ripped off people.

 

[smile72]

Wow they ripped people off. At least they're giving it to them now.

 

[Nathan Drake]

"Shit, they're suing and want what we had initially promised? I guess we better give it to them and not be huge dicks. Now, lets just give a specific date that they can do it, so that way people can STILL miss out! We're so nice!"

 

[Panzer Tacticer]

False advertisement is actually a criminal act and frankly I am glad they had to cave in. Fuck EA and the donkey they rode in on.

I am not sure I could care less for Battlefield 1943. I have always liked Battlefield 1942 though. But the thing is, a promise known to be a deciding factor in a lot of sales that was in truth a lie, is FALSE ADVERTISING, and that is a criminal offense. Fuck you EA and fuck your lying!

 

[Deleted member 473940]

False advertisement is actually a criminal act and frankly I am glad they had to cave in. Fuck EA and the donkey they rode in on.

I am not sure I could care less for Battlefield 1943. I have always liked Battlefield 1942 though. But the thing is, a promise known to be a deciding factor in a lot of sales that was in truth a lie, is FALSE ADVERTISING, and that is a criminal offense. Fuck you EA and fuck your lying!

Yep. But why didnt people sue when all the PSN shit happened...

 

[MarcusRaven]

Yep. But why didnt people sue when all the PSN shit happened...

They did. They failed. That's why Sony has a line in their agreement now that makes you unable to join a class action lawsuit against them, in trade for access to PSN.

 

[jalaneme]

Good I am glad they were sued for false advertising, I just wish naughty dog were sued for false advertising, customers expect a certain feature to be there in the game but its not and naughty dog doesn't even tell any customers till they found out themselves when they buy the game making them millions of money in the process for keeping quiet about it.

the same problem with locking saves files on the ps3, game developers never tell you about the copy protection on save files till you buy it yourself and find out your save file is locked, these kind of practices should be banned and consumers should sue for misconduct, time lost when copy protected save files get corrupted at no fault of your own and you can't even back them up and time wasted on your save file when it's deleted or lost when your console dies, locking a save file to your console it's the most stupidest idea ever.

 

[FluffyLunamoth]

Yep. But why didnt people sue when all the PSN shit happened...

They did. They failed. That's why Sony has a line in their agreement now that makes you unable to join a class action lawsuit against them, in trade for access to PSN.

Actually, they took that out.

 

[Schlupi]

I am sickened by modern business practice. And they wonder why we pirate games.

 

[Panzer Tacticer]

I am sickened by modern business practice. And they wonder why we pirate games.

Most 'modern' business practices, are actually hold overs from 20th century business models that companies refuse to let go. Most of the actions of the RIAA and the MPAA are just the petulant refusal to admit the world changed.

Netflix is currently the single biggest and best example of 21st century thinking utterly owning a 20th century marketing model. I have no need, not one iota of need of a cable company and their archaic programming methods. Why pay a fortune mainly for channels you don't want, when you can pay a puny fraction of the same cost, and have access to vast sums of programs. Netflix is like paying almost nothing for almost everything. They wouldn't be offering it, if they couldn't afford to do so. I'd gladly let them double the price if they added current airing content more aggressively.

It's time the market accepted, that there simply isn't enough of us without broadband, not enough of us without a means to accommodate lots of data movement to make thinking that brick and mortar retail sites are an essential. I don't care if it is hard on them, I'm the consumer, I want what's best for me. There is currently no reason why any console game needs to be identifiable as a 'console' game. The only thing that makes my PS3 different from my laptop or my desktop, is they look different in the mirror.

The other day, I treated myself to my first ever PS3 game eh. Bought Dragon Age Origins (had some store credit to burnoff). I put it in the machine, and it starts to install, and I chuckle to myself, 'I thought the beauty of console games was always you just put it in the machine and played it' Had to wait about 15-20 minutes for it to do it's thing. Plus it needed a patch. Our console games are clearly not really all that different from PC games. They just get made for different custom made machines. In some respects, that is not so bad still. Although it is clear if you ask a person what console they have, the follow up questions is usually what version.

There's no real reason though, that my game needed to be sold as a PS3 game in a PS3 case off of a shelf. I could have just as easily bought it entirely as a digital data file. Storing it would have been no more hassle than what I go through with my PC wargames I buy as digital downloads.

I only buy those though, as the company that makes them, doesn't use DRM beyond requiring a serial be inputted on install.
I have snubbed games I might have wanted, that I do NOT want, all because the owner is a shithead and insists HIS fucking DRM is a good idea.

Newsflash, companies go out of business all the time, because the owner is NOT always right.

 

[awssk8er]

If I could sue Nintendo everytime they broke a promise...

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

If I could sue Nintendo everytime they broke a promise...

Nothing would happen because this is different.