Gamer Banned From Dragon Age II Over Forum Post 469
RogueyWon writes "Kotaku is reporting that a Dragon Age II gamer banned from BioWare's forums for an allegedly inflammatory post has been locked out of the (singleplayer only) game for the duration of the ban. This is a consequence of EA's backend systems, which link forum accounts to the accounts that players use to access their games. This would appear to be a worrying new development; while trolling forums has led to bans from massively multiplayer games in the past (arguably with some justification), the extension of the principle to singleplayer games, where an abusive player cannot affect the enjoyment of others, must surely be a step too far."
Re:Bad summary (Score:4, Insightful)
He bought the game from EA online store and because he was banned, the installer didn't work.
Thus effectively banning him from the game. Your point? Or do you wish to continue being a pedant?
Re:Bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
The distinction is important because there is a difference between EA knowingly and intentionally banning the user from single-player game, and EA accidently banning the user from single-player game. If it is an accident, and EA agrees that it is wrong, and fixes it... then there is no reason to attribute malice to EA.
Re:Bad summary (Score:4, Insightful)
The summary does indeed make it sound as if the guy was banned from playing a game that was already installed and running, thus being banned from using something already in his possession. After all, there is a login screen in the game. There is a bit difference between being barred from downloading something and being barred from actually using it after it was purchased and installed.
Violated Wheaton's Law, chose to be a dick (Score:3, Insightful)
And bad things happened to him?
Well, good. Dicks need a solid pounding from time to time, to remind them that throwing down has consequences online as well as in meatspace.
If he's got a problem with it, he can sue them, which will just prove how much of a dick he really is.
Re:Bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
If this were a massively multiplayer game, I would agree entirely. In fact, if this was a ban from the multiplayer portion of an online and offline game, I would also agree. However, the Dragon Age games are resolutely single-player only. You can't actually ruin somebody else's experience of the game, in the way that shouting and screaming in a movie theatre would ruin the movie for others.
I don't like to push an analogy too far, but I think there's a better one here. This is like buying a DVD from a store and then standing around in the store shouting abuse. The staff would be absolutely within their rights to remove you from the store, but not to confiscate the DVD you'd bought off you as well.
Re:Incredulous. (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, it's very easy to say "simply don't buy their games", but with that attitude, we'd most likely never get any form of entertainment anymore, because almost all of them include some restriction or price tag we're not happy with.
The choice remains between sticking up for your own values and missing out on some piece of entertainment you're dying to experience, or accepting the restrictions and enjoy the game after all. Considering that option 1 makes virtually no difference to EA, the choice is often easily made for option 2. But IMO, even having made that choice, it's still valid to rant about the restrictions on the entertainment. You may have bought the game, but that doesn't mean you fully agree with the restrictions it comes with.
Re:Bad summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Preventing the user from playing a game he'd bought.
Preventing the user from installing a game he'd bought (And, by extension, preventing the user from playing a game he'd bought).
The installation is irrelevant. The important parts are that he bought the game legally and then was not able to play it. The mechanism of denial isn't important.
Re:entitled to a refund? (Score:5, Insightful)
he IS entitled to a refund.
no good were exchanged yet money was taken.
which part of that do you not understand?
its just that simple. it really is.
I have no problem with the company banning him, but I do have a problem with not returning his purchase price when they refuse to offer what he gave money for. or, do you think its more like a 'donation' and they 'opt' to give you your goods or not at their discretion?
don't be an ass. give him his money back and then just part company.
if the game co does not return his money, they are looking at BEING SUED themselves, for theft. yes, not kidding.
Re:entitled to a refund? (Score:3, Insightful)
He is not entitled to a refund.
Events:
1. User buys license entitling him to use software.
2. User breaches agreement and loses license to use the software.
The fact that he did not use the software in the time period between him purchasing the license and losing it due to the breach of it's terms is irrelevant. They cannot be sued for anything and owe him nothing. They are acting within their rights.
Once again, I am not saying that what they are doing is not morally wrong, but it is legal.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bad summary (Score:3, Insightful)
I own over 200 games on Steam. I can play any one of them anytime
Can you sell them, loan them to friends? Can you easily play one game on one PC and someone else play a different game you "own" on a different PC you also own?
Reminder (Score:4, Insightful)
Dear Bioware,
Thank you for reminding me of your DLC centric business model. You have again shown that a pirated version of your software is superior than that of the product offered in your online store. I hope you enjoy alienating your paying customers.
Sincerely,
UC
Re:entitled to a refund? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't believe that by paying for software that you are agreeing to the terms in service. You would first have to DOWNLOAD the software and be presented with the Terms of Service on install. As he was NOT able to download and install, he then never actually agreed to the Terms of Service and therefore should be given a refund.
So what you are saying is that theft is legal?
Re:Bad summary (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, it is, since the failure point comes in at a different moment. It's like having a television delivered. The actual case is akin to expecting the TV to show up today, so you clear some space to deal with that, and plan to use it that night. Then you get a call and get told "it's not showing up today." Yeah, it sucks, but it's not there, so there's not much you can do. Preventing someone from playing an already installed game is having the TV show up, and get set up, but then the delivery people stand there and slap your hand away from the remote any time you go to use it. It's there, there's no real reason you couldn't use it, except some gatekeeper's making you not.
EA's installation manager is actually a *download* manager. It's merely delaying the delivery of digital goods due to a flaw in the backend stating that no deliveries can be made to that address when someone clicked an option to stop other kinds of activity from that address. If you can't see the functional difference in the situations, it's because you're being wilfully stubborn.
Re:Bad summary (Score:2, Insightful)
If you can't see the functional difference in the situations, it's because you're being wilfully stubborn.
So if you disagree with him then the only possible explanation is that he's being wilfully stubborn? There's no chance at all, no matter how miniscule, that it might be you that's not seeing the essential similarity rather than him who's not seeing the essential difference?
Have you tried seeing anyone about this problem?
Re:call the waaambulance (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you actually read the comment that got him banned? All he said was, “Have you [meaning Bioware] sold your souls to the EA devil?”
The idea that sort of innocous criticism warrants a ban is ridiculous. Heck, on that basis, you outta be banned Slashdot.
Ironically, based on the response, the answer to his question is apparently "Yes."
Re:Reminder (Score:4, Insightful)
Not entirely true.
This guy obviously had a legitimate copy, since his game copy was tied to his forum account. Now it no longer works. Do you believe he's going to go "shucks, I shouldn't have done that. Here's $60, may I have another copy please?"
No. At best, he goes "fuck it and fuck you, I'm done with your game." More realistically he goes out for ten seconds of Google'ing, finds a crack and continues on his merry way. Turning a paying customer into a pirate. What he does about Dragon Age III (or whatever) is certainly up in the air. If I were him, I wouldn't give them another dollar of mine. Of course, I might stil want their game... I wonder if there's any solution to wanting to play a game without paying the creator?
Not to mention, of course, how he reacts with his friends who might be intersted but not have bought the game yet. "Yeah guys, I have a cracked copy right here, just give me a blank DVD."