Sue EA while the Suing is good?

Navaros · April 20, 2003

I've had a revelation recently.

My Emp CD-casing states: "join our online Empire!", "Competitive Tournaments" "up-to-the-minute news". We all know this is simply not true. Therefore, as it now stands, EA has made false claims with the product it has sold me seeing as there are no Tournaments or news any more.

Nowadays if you pick up any EA thing you will see: "EA reserves the right to terminate the online features of this product after giving 90 days notice" or for NHL 2003 "EA reserves the right to terminate the online features of this product after giving 90 days notice or 30 days after the end of the 2003 NHL season"

Some may wonder *why* EA puts these things on their packaging now. The answer is simple. EA knows they will abandon everything with their logo on it a very short time after the product goes Retail. But abandoning is not enough! No, to make even more money, EA now also will disable all online features of their games. They know they will, so they put these legal disclaimers on their boxes so as they don't get sued.

But since Emperor has no such disclaimers and EA is *not* living up to what they advertised, then it stands to reason that EA is in a vulnerable position to be sued at the moment.

I bet the only reason WOL still exists right now is because EA fears lawsuits if they yank it. But they don't have to yank WOL to have committed false advertising fraud.

the moral: I hate EA, you hate EA - so maybe we should sue while the suing is good!

VigilVirus · April 20, 2003

One things comes to my mind here... Navaros and Blizzard...

GhostHunter · April 20, 2003

Sorry Nav, not everyone of us had the time, money, and resources to sue a multi-billion dollar company ::).

Navaros · April 20, 2003

hey man stay on topic plz. ty

Navaros · April 20, 2003

Sorry Nav, not everyone of us had the time, money, and resources to sue a multi-billion dollar company ::).

then start saving your pennies for this goal! ;D

besides there might be some rich dudes here at fed2k, who knows

VigilVirus · April 20, 2003

Sorry Nav, not everyone of us had the time, money, and resources to sue a multi-billion dollar company ::).

Hehe, lol ;D

DjCiD · April 20, 2003

I have stated many times I am boycotting EA I have actually taken EA games back on my Xbox when I found out the weren't going to make the XBlive but would make them online for PS2 and GC. This was just another log on the fire. The were setting on a goldmine with Emperor but I guess didn't advertise right and should have released that Yuri's game so soon afterward. Didn't one of the Ex-Westwood guys here say it was competition with their own company buy releasing them so close? Or something like that. I still think Emp is a great game but I don't know how much more support EA could give it now. They have changed grfx engines right? Why would they go back, the only hope would be a new version of a Dune game but that is doubtfully too. They did have that one poll over at the Generals website about what type of game would you like to see next. Hell if they did make a new Dune RTS I don't even know if I'd want to buy it cause they wouldn't be supporting it 3 months later ;D

Screw EA *puts middle finger up* >:(

DukeLeto · April 20, 2003

Emperor was "abandoned" for three reasons: 1)The reviewers said it sucked, 2)A lot of people said it sucked, and 3)Thusly no one bought it.

It's simple economics: If something is a flop, you give up on it.

FireSnake · April 20, 2003

Why do You people want to destroy EA Games?

WHY ON EARTH would You destroy such a great company that has brought us all such games like The Sims and James Bond 007 - Nightfire? ... ... ::) ::) ::)

Not to mention how they SLIGHTLY MODIFIED WWS's C&C Universe...

Such a great company indeed.

EA GAMES - BUY EVERYTHING

EA SPORTS - IT'S UP TO YOUR WALLET

- Matthew

Navaros · April 20, 2003

It's simple economics: If something is a flop, you give up on it.

those economics don't work with *me*. if i am a paying customer for any company, EA included - I *EXPECT* to be taken care of. I expect to be treated like a King. I expect the company I buy from to bend over backwards for me and do everything possible to keep me as a Customer happy. Sometimes that is going to mean the company will have to incur expenses in order to please me. So be it. That's a cost of doing business in this day and age. Customer is #1, no matter what. All great companies have and nurture this attitude.

by screwing over their paying customers like me, EA is ticking off a huge portion of their exact target market who will never buy their products again in the future. That's bad business. Although there are enough people out there who are quite willing to be used by EA and have their hard-earned money sucked out of them by the evil machine that is EA, at least I am proud that there are a good number of us who will not allow ourselves as customers to be treated like dirt. I have more respect for myself than that. So should everyone.

GhostHunter · April 20, 2003

Any company that treates YOU Nav like a King should be shot down by repeated elephant gun shots...

Seal89999 · April 20, 2003

Sorry Nav, not everyone of us had the time, money, and resources to sue a multi-billion dollar company ::).

Nav dosent either..........lol

But its true. It is their fault that emperor went bust. They should have dont alot more....but dident. Its sad that they dont support there games. But eh what is the normal joe gonna do. The biggest thing your going to do is stop buying there products. I admit that EA dosent follow up to support the multiplayer section but when they produce games i find them quite fun on single player. They make good games and just dont support them which leades to there downfall. Maybe eventually they will learn something....doubtfull though.

Mihail · April 20, 2003

Remember..EA doesn't make games,the companies do,EA just buys the companies and publishes them.

FireSnake · April 20, 2003

I didn't state that EA made the games.

- Matthew

Mihail · April 20, 2003

That was meant for Sard Elite :)

FireSnake · April 20, 2003

Thanks for specifying. :)

- Matthew

Gobalopper · April 20, 2003

The problem was the game didn't sell enough for EA's standards. They want blockbusters and Emperor even though it sold around 500,000 wasn't a blockbuster.

DukeLeto · April 20, 2003

It's simple economics: If something is a flop, you give up on it.
those economics don't work with *me*. if i am a paying customer for any company, EA included - I *EXPECT* to be taken care of. I expect to be treated like a King. I expect the company I buy from to bend over backwards for me and do everything possible to keep me as a Customer happy. Sometimes that is going to mean the company will have to incur expenses in order to please me. So be it. That's a cost of doing business in this day and age. Customer is #1, no matter what. All great companies have and nurture this attitude.
by screwing over their paying customers like me, EA is ticking off a huge portion of their exact target market who will never buy their products again in the future. That's bad business. Although there are enough people out there who are quite willing to be used by EA and have their hard-earned money sucked out of them by the evil machine that is EA, at least I am proud that there are a good number of us who will not allow ourselves as customers to be treated like dirt. I have more respect for myself than that. So should everyone.

Um, so they should screw the 10 million+ people who have made Command and Conquer the best selling video game sereis ever, in favor of working on your petty problems? ::)

Jack Leaf · April 20, 2003

Emperor was "abandoned" for three reasons: 1)The reviewers said it sucked, 2)A lot of people said it sucked, and 3)Thusly no one bought it.
It's simple economics: If something is a flop, you give up on it.

Huh?

Our greatest game rewiever, Niko Nirvi ( ;) ) gave it 90 points! Emperor was total hit in Finland, all bought it and so on! I was chatting in IRC, and said that has somebody played Emperor. In that channel, where I were talking was 16 people, and four active ;) Three said, that have played the game and liked it.

Odd, maybe Finland is just too small ???

DukeLeto · April 20, 2003

Most of the major sites, such as Gamesdomain, PC Gamer, etc., gave it really low scores.

Gobalopper · April 20, 2003

PC Gamer gave it 89%.

http://www.dune2k.com/?page=duniverse-emperor&show=info-reviews

Navaros · April 21, 2003

although I love Emperor, I do agree with the criticisms in many of the reviews that slammed it hard. ie: avault - that's a very reliable site for reviews and usually their reviews can be trusted; they gave Emp 50% and nailed it for the pathfinding bugs and unfinished half-baked singleplayer campaigns

i think most of the reviews that gave Emperor really high scores were done by casual gamers who aren't dedicated RTS players and don't take the game seriously. they just see Emperor as another thing to play on a temporary basis and since it was fun for the few hours they spent playing it in preparation for the review, the bar they use to judge Emperor with isn't as high as it should be: hence some absurd scores ie: 99 out of 100

for people who do value winning(within the Rules, of course) above all else and play RTS games in a professional way, they would not enjoy Emperor as much. because there are many impairments to a *fair* online contest due to numerous pathfinding errors which cause units to behave in unreasonable ways. these won't matter as much to unprofessional RTS players who would never want/be able to get a good rank in a Competition, but to a serious RTS player who thrives on Competing they make all the difference in the world

these two schools of thought are probably the reason for the wide range of scores Emperor got

Seal89999 · April 21, 2003

The problem was the game didn't sell enough for EA's standards. They want blockbusters and Emperor even though it sold around 500,000 wasn't a blockbuster.

I say screw all their standards if they "put out" a game they should be with it til the end!!!!!!!

mechadragon · April 30, 2003

I, too, am boycotting EA.

I'm sure they don't really care though. See, I am not the kind of person who will buy a game once, then pay again for the same game month after month like people do with EverQuest and The Sims Online. EA has learned that they can sell the game one time and make $40 and have a nice little profit, and $20 each month thereafter with no manufacturing costs that simply goes stright to the profit margin. If the person plays only one month, EA is out nothing, and if the person decides to play again later, "That will be $20 sir".

I'm not that stupid. I know it cost money to keep servers running, that's what I payed the $40 bucks for. Other companies, including EA, have offered online services for years now without charging a monthly fee.

Why now? Did the cost suddenly jump? No, it still costs just a few pennies a day to let a server set in a corner. They do it because they are greedy. Once sales drop on a game, they figure they have squeezed all it is worth out of it and it's on to the next one. There is more money to be made elsewhere. But as long as there are 30 year old men living in thier parent's basements deperate enough to cyber with another 30 year old man pretending to be Britney Spears, EA will gladly be there to bill them month after month for the pixelated pleasure.

Sorry EA, I live in the Real World

nemafakei · April 30, 2003

"I expect to be treated like a King."

Tough, your highness. Perhaps you'd like to compare your terrible plight to the situation of the majority of the world.

And you complain that you are being treated like dirt if you are not treated like royalty?

Think about it, Arohk, in terms of expense and gain - not to the compant, but as an absolute: There is a cost of keeping a server running (including electricity, the initial outset, if you want it to be dedicated, the use of bandwidth, a human tech support), and it would be a luxury used by so few - would you be willing to pay for the resources wasted on your little luxury, for the time that you use it, as well as keeping the server running when you might use it?

The happiness derived from such expense is not enough to make the expense worthwhile - and I am NOT talking about 'worthwhile' from an EA perspective.

Besides which, there's the fact that you have still been sold a perfectly good non-online game, which, I, for one, am glad I have bought.

Sign In

Sue EA while the Suing is good?

Recommended Posts

Navaros

VigilVirus

GhostHunter

Navaros

Navaros

VigilVirus

DjCiD

DukeLeto

FireSnake

Navaros

GhostHunter

Seal89999

Mihail

FireSnake

Mihail

FireSnake

Gobalopper

DukeLeto

Jack Leaf

DukeLeto

Gobalopper

Navaros

Seal89999

mechadragon

nemafakei

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information