1503AD and the Rapid Erosion of End-User Rights?
Agram asks: "I bought the Sunflowers' 1503AD game practically as soon as it came out, since my wife and I loved to play the old 1602AD together via LAN. 1503AD's expanded multiplayer feature was touted all over the internet, yet when I bought the game, for a costly $52, I was very unpleasantly surprised that it had no multiplayer mode at all. Despite the continuous claims that the company is working on the MP patch, we're now over 7 months away from the initial release, the game now sells for a measly $15, and I have yet to play a single second of it, as I have no interest in the single player experience. My attempts at communication with the company led to nothing but dead-ends and unprovoked mistreatment. Unfortunately, this is not a unique occurrence in today's software entertainment industry, where atrocious lack of support is growing rampant and is increasingly coupled with ridiculous EULA's. I have therefore decided to finally exercise my end-user rights and pursue a class-action lawsuit against the company. I am now asking you, fellow Slashdot reader, for help in seeking answers to the following questions as, well assistance in assembling signatures for the class-action lawsuit."
For more details regarding this issue please visit this site."
"Here are my questions:
- How does one go about locating a reputable and internationally active law firm that could handle this case?
- What is the required number of the participants for a class-action lawsuit to be instantiated?
- Do you think that this course of action will yield any results?
For more details regarding this issue please visit this site."
2nd, i'm not sure how strong your case is. you say "...multiplayer feature was touted all over the internet", but was it touted all over the box?
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
And from how frequently this gets said, apparently neither is anyone else on Slashdot. That said, you may want to try asking one. I've been told they're easily located in the phone book.
/.'.
How this got to the front page I'll never know. I could understand if the story was about how common a practice this seems to be, and what our rights are despite hopelssly one-sided EULAs, and advice on what to do in the future. That would have made sense.
But a story that goes 'Wah, i didn't investigate this before buying', 'Wah, i didn't take it back 6 months ago and now it's too late.', 'Wah, i'm gonna sue. Yeah, that's it, I'll sue!', 'Uh, how do i sue? I'm too cheap/lazy to actually talk to a lawyer, so I'll ask
Since you *are* asking those of us who don't really know, here's my opinion. You don't have a case, and definately not grounds for a class action. You should hav simply returned the game 6 months ago.
Seems from what I read on the homepage is that they are conducting multiplayer testing atm, or will in the near future and a public beta/test will come before the final multiplayer patch.
Are you sueing them because they took the decision to not ship multiplayer with the final product and you where to lazy to read some reviews that probably states this before you bought the game? Or are you sueing them because they can't write code (read: develope multiplayer) as fast as you would like ?
IMO. seems like an extremly weak lawsuit.
--- No, english is not my mother tongue.
Why do people insist on asking for legal advice on Slashdot?
Anyway, I'm sure you know that Class Action lawsuits rarely have a good outcome for the class...usually they get a $5 coupon for some product the company makes, while the lawyers get millions.
Lastly, I really think it's your fault for purchasing it before a given feature was actually available. Unless the box promised multiplayer, you did this to yourself. The feature that was touted appears to be reviews of the product (i.e. the beef you have is with the reviewers, in that case) and if that's all you based your purchase on, I suspect that you'll be out of luck when you begin discussing this with your lawyer.
Anyway, what does any of this have to do with EULAs? Reading through your post and links, I found nothing of relevance. Looks to me like you're trying to get Slashdotters to your cause by bringing up a hotly debated part of closed source (and even some open source) software.
A class action law suit is a huge deal and will take lots of time money and effort. It isn't worth it for the measly 50 bucks. Go to small claims court. You don't need a lawyer, but you can get one if you want. There are tons of websites written by people who go to small claims court on a daily basis that tell you what you need to do. You do some research, file some papers, go to court once and get some money. Very often the other guy doesn't even show and you get some dough.
Oh yeah, IANAL.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
What you SHOULD have done was:
I am not saying the above has a 100% chance of success, but at least you would have had some chance to succeed. Furthurmore, should more people do this, the stores will get tired of the returns and will charge back to the distributor, who will in turn go after the manufacturer.
In short - if you cannot buy what you want TODAY - DON'T. Don't accept promises that "It will do $thing later" - say "Fine - then when it does $thing I will buy it. Until then the money stays in my bank. Good day."
www.eFax.com are spammers
Try small claims court if you want your money back.
Try a bottle of Jack Daniels if you want to 'get even'. You won't but the Jack will take your mind off of it for a few hours.
Better yet, chalk it up to one of those very good life lessons we all learn, Buyer Beware.
So, you spent $50 on a video game, and found out it wasn't very good.
I'm sure that's never happened before in the history of the world! Better sue, or this might become commonplace!
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
You might as well get pirate copies of the games. The support can't be worse. In some cases, the pirated game is superior to the one you bought: none of those noxious FCKGW-87H45- etc etc etc codes to hassle with.
Hi. I'm Troy McClure. You might remember me from such tech-support dramas as "73 Hours on Hold" and "Can't Stop the Muzak".
Instead of a lawsuit, why don't you just return the game to the place you bought it from?
When I purchased Anarchy Online, I tried playing it for a few weeks. The gameplay was attrocious due to severe lag and many bugs. I wasn't a matter of just being slightly difficult to play - it was flat out impossible to play. Two or three frames per second, at best... if you could even stay connected. And it didn't get better for a looong time.
So, I sent an email to the place I bought the game from (Amazon.com) telling them that I purchased an online game that I expected to be able to play online and that it had failed miserably and since I could not even actually PLAY it, I had not recieved what I had paid for and wished to return the game.
They obliged and I recieved a refund without any hassles.
Unless you have a case for a class action RICO (racketeer influenced and corrupt organization, a RICO suit triples the damages that would normally be awarded) suit, don't bother with a class action. Small claims for damages and court costs (minimal, probably like $10) would be the way to go if you actually take legal action. A better idea would be to either go through your credit card company or even to send the legal department of the company a letter insisting on allowing you to get a refund or you will take legal action as well as let everyone know about what happened. Remember that in the USA, truth is an absolute defense to libel and slander charges, so don't forget to review the game on sites like epinions.com or even Amazon.
woah! now that's an addict in the
real sense of the word.
"Hail, Gamer!"
I mean really. You end up spending $50+ on a game that sucks and may cost $15 a year later. I look at the year+ old games. Games that are over a year old and still cost over $30 due to demand are probably worth buying.
As to your original question, did the game box say anywhere that it was a multi-player version or that one was "soon to be available?"
Was there ever anything but the company saying "We're working on it"? That's not a committment, legal or otherwise.
No? Forget it. Pay your Stupid Tax and move on. (Stupid Tax = $ spent that you regret spending on something that wasn't worth it. I've done it, you've done it, we all have. It's part of life.)
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
Your rights, such as they are, are outlined in the license agreement that you accept. If you do not accept the license agreement, you have no right to use the software. If you use it anyway, you are a felon. This crime is far worse than rape or murder, because it strikes at the heart of the system of natural incentives which drives our free economy. Any "rights" that the vendor chooses to grant you are gifts, pure and simple, and you certainly have not earned them. The vendor has sunk millions of dollars of capital into developing the product. They have every right to expect a return on this investment, and the fact they are generously allowing you to use the software at all is more than you probably deserve. Your role in this culture is to pay them for the work performed by their employees, who are damned lucky to have jobs (and almost certainly don't appreciate it). Pay up and shut up.
These "rights" of the "consumer" are like the "rights" of women or animals; it's an absurdity on the face of it. Slashdot has no business wasting our time with this leftist garbage. It says up there "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Is that what this is? Decidedly not. Competent "nerds" (technical people) are by definition conservative Libertarians, for two reasons: First, they are productive individuals and the principle of rational self-interest proves that they will not support the socialists. Second, they are by definition intelligent and logical people (they work with logic all day, do they not?) and therefore they cannot be fooled by liberal myths and nonsense like so-called "heliocentric" cosmology, "evolution", or the redistribution of wealth (organized coercive parasitism). A leftist nerd is a contradiction in terms, and therefore cannot exist.
Did the box say 'multiplayer?' If no, then you fucked up. You got what you bought.
If yes, then you fucked up; you should have taken it back to the store immediately and demanded your money back.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
The original poster obviously doesn't know much about class-action lawsuits. IANAL, but I do know a thing or two.
No law firm will pursue such a thing unless the following criteria are met:
* There has to be a very large class, at least when consumer products issues are concerned, so that any remedy has substantial monetary value. How many people bought this product? Like, 50? I've never even heard of it.
* There has to be a remedy that easy translates into dollars that makes sense in the case. How do you put a value on providing missing functionality? The only remedy is for a refund... which is problematic, because...
* There has to be an affirmative representation that justifies the remedy. In this case, it is arguable that there was no such affirmative representation. The packaging of the box DOES NOT mention multi-player, right? And you'd better believe that any judge will agree that it is fair for the specs of a product to change right up until shipping time.
Class-action lawyers typically do not get paid by a client(and it is possible that they CANNOT get paid by a client - again, IANAL). They make all of their money on a percentage of the value of the remedy, and on recovering their costs.
The iPod suits that were recently filed fit the bill - millions of members of a potential class, obvious remedy (provide a battery that has the advertised life), and obvious return - millions of users X the cost of the hypothetical battery.
Bottom line: unless millions of people, literally, bought this game, there isn't a chance in hell of a normal class-action lawsuit. Even if that many people did buy it, it still doesn't look too good.
It isn't just that Slashdot is the wrong place to go for legal advice. Agram's whole attitude is just plain childish. Here's the scenario: somebody makes a cool game. People love it and play it to death. Motivated by their previous success, the developers plan a followup. But they overreach themselves, fall behind schedule, and end up releasing an incomplete product.
This is not anything new. It certainly isn't a "Rapid Erosion of End-User Rights". Game buyers have been getting stung since forever, especially those that rush out and buy without reading the reviews. It sucks, but it's not a major moral crisis.
But since legal advice is solicited, here's mine: forget it. You're not going to recover anything, even if the law is on your side. You can prove a claim, but the claimee isn't obligated to sell his family into slavery to satisfy you. Or do you think that a software company that can't get a product out the door has infinitely deep pockets?
1. Company releases online game
2. You buy game hoping to play online
3. Company pulls all server to save money
The problem is finding an attorney to understand these cases and be willing to represent us. Otherwise, this is pretty much an open-and-shut case.
Any slashdot reader who recently graduated from law school and would like to win a class action lawsuit as a career stepping stone? Talk to us.
Sunflowers is a german company, there are no class-action lawsuits in Germany. So stop wasting your effort. EA seems to be the US distributor so you could try them instead. But how can they be blamed? Did EA ever advertise multi-player?
There was a /. article not long ago, where a guy took MS to small claims court to get his $200 back for a copy of WindowsXP (which he did not use, and the EULA promises a refund if not used...). Basically, make sure you're very well prepared with simple, explanatory information for a non-technical person, and you'll get your $50 and court costs back.
Personally, i think this is why "Pirating" a game to just try it out is a good thing. If you had "tried" it out first, you would have realized how flawed the game was, and not had to go through this hassle.
Every one I've been to assumes you're a pirate
Here's how to get a refund on partially opened but unused retail software: Claim that you didn't agree to a contract that the software's installer presented and that the contract provides for a full refund to those who do not agree. Present a printed copy of the contract.
the only option you have is exchange for another copy of the same title. That accomplishes precisely nothing.
Exchange the title, then return it after two days. If they open the exchanged box (like Toys R Us did once), then keep exchanging until they run out. The defect rate for that title will shoot up. If none of the boxes contains what's advertised on their packaging, then they're all defective.
Why do people insist on asking for legal advice on Slashdot?
It seems you misunderstood the article. OP wrote:
How else is one supposed to ask the question "how do I find such a lawyer?"
I'm also looking for parts for my Ford Pinto, I'd like them relatively cheap as I paid good money for the car when it came out and I've been slightly dissappointed in it's quality. Is this the end of good quality cars as we know it?
Pretty widgets? What pretty widgets?
Saying you should read the reviews is bullshit. Game reviews are not worth the paper they are written on wich for online versions is very bad news indeed. Remember Hidden & Dangerous? Reviewed as the second coming of gameplay. They never got the bugs out.
The game industry like the computer industry in general is very childish. Would you accept it if you bought a car and one of the cylinders doesn't work? No? Then why are we supposed to accept missing pixels on lcd's? Would accept a book with 30% of the words mispelled but they are gonna fix it anyday now? Then why do you accept buggy software?
Sueing is considered an evil but sadly it seems to be the only way to get companies to behave. Cars didn't become safe until people sued. Tobacco wasn't labelled as dangerous until people sued. Computer companies will keep selling crap at high prices with no support until we sue.
Will it happen? I doubt it. Have you ever seen a consumer affairs program touch software?
About the only real advise I can give this person is put up a site advising everyone against ever buying a product from that company again. Invest time and money in a review site that really reviews games by playing them from start to finish and noting down every bug and crash. That is the way real stuff is tested. You know the stuff someone once sued about.
My warning. Gathering of Developers, the publishers of Mafia and vietcong, have intresting games but their support is total crap. Buy their software only if you are 100% sure it will run for you. If the demo is buggy then so will the final game be in their case. Note that I had problems only with force feedback but the rest was smooth sailing. Others never even got the game to load. Play the demo. If it sucks then so will the game. THEY WILL NOT FIX ANY BUGS between demo and release time. Patches afterwards are only done by a couple of companies. On a positive note Papyrus of Grand Prix Legends released patches that didn't fix games. They upgraded the game to take advantage of new hardware. Then again the demo played perfectly on my pc also. Mmmm, good demo, good manual, good box, good game, good support. Spotting a trend here.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Before going any further, perhaps it needs to be mentioned that I am the one who is behind this story.
/. in the first place. Please understand that asking about legal issues here is only one of many benefits that come with such action. Other, perhaps more important aspects involve exposure, as well as targetting user group that is most closely associated with the given topic. By doing so, I am hoping that I may find sympathetic soul(s) and/or person(s) who may have some past experience in this field and who may be able to share their valuable info regarding reputable law firms that deal with the INTERNATIONAL SOFTWARE-RELATED LAW. Such law firms due to their specific focus are not commonly found in a phonebook, and therefore I have resorted to the place that harbors the largest amount of people who are conceivably the most exposed to this kind of a problem.
First off, it seems that you did not bother reading anything on the website whose link was provided in the story, so isn't it a bit hypocritical of you to complain aboutg my apparent inability to read the info on the retail box of the game?
In addition, if you had chosen to read the stuff on my website, you'd notice that the demo that is still downloadable from EA (America's distributor), claims multiplayer support on the screen when quitting the game, needless to mention that the demo *has* the multiplayer button in the menu, yet it is missing in the final product.
There are also links on my website that point to quicktime recordings of live interviews of the game publishers which are touting the multiplayer functionality without any hint of the fact that is missing in the final product, as well as multiple websites and the cached version of the game's official site suggesting that the game is shipping with the multiplayer included.
If this is not enough, then the fact that right after my lawsuit was announced, the German publisher opted for "reworking" the game website's content in order to adjust their "mis-statements" regarding multiplayer (cached version is available on my website), as well as the continuous ignoring of user inquiries and systematic banning of forum accounts and/or posts that have anything to do with the inquiry regarding the multiplayer, should tell you just how "deep this rabbithole really is."
Finally, the reference that the multiplayer is soon-to-be-published, posted on the game's website has been untouched literally ever since the game came into being. The only change occured when my legal action was announced on thier forums and the game publishers became aware of my endeavors. Suddenly, the misleading information found on their website was suddenly changed after being intact for months.
Next time, instead of acting like a smartass, please take some time and read about the topic before making yourself look dumb.
Finally, someone questioned why I am seeking legal advice from
> I don't know the specifics of this case but there are some key points that we, as consumers, should consider.
.
Termites are consumers, we are customers
Unless you start making this distinctions, there is no reason for the companies to treat you this way.
Therefore, in response to your dubiously irrelevant post, please see here and here (the second is the link to their site prior to my announcement of this lawsuit -- the screenshot was taken on the 6th of January 2004)
Uru (newest Myst game) had the main function of it being an online mode (aka "Live"), requiring it to access much of the content of the game by interacting with others.
Apparently, the online function of the game WAS on the game packaging itself, as well as mentioned on the official site.
But Ubi effectively scammed everyone who paid for it for the online function by shutting the Live part down claiming a low amount of subscribers, even though they limited it to 30 people max on a mere 2 servers, while Live function still being buggy and laggy as it was basically still in Beta testing.
Thankfully, one of the founders of Cyan (company who started the series) posted a letter to the fans saying it was basically shutdown down indefinitely until/if they can fix the bugs to make it reasonably playable. And also mentioned that they will switch to the back-up plan of releasing expansions via online and possibly in-store downloads, with the first one being free.
I'd hope if they fix the bugs that Cyan would choose a better company then Ubi to run the game servers, apparently the Uru Live lag was somehow greatly affecting all the other games hosted on Ubi servers.
Look, it is an EXCELLENT example since 5 lawfirms have found enough to file suits. Don't shoot the messenger - read the headlines - IANAL, and I didn't file the suits, nor did I suggest that anyone should.
:)
Get off my case
Jonathan
I bought a first generation Xbox ($300) just so I could play Nightcaster.
I should get an award for pain and suffering, in addition to my $350 being refunded.
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
Let the buyer beware, not let the buyer assume he's getting something, gets something else, then sues.
There has to be a way to fix things so that you can't post a reply without visiting the provided links... Either that or the admins here should provide more text in the story body.
Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
I hate to say it but to take a pragmatic view of the issue, game developers and publishers are not to blame for poor quality games. The blame must lie with the consumers.
Three or four years ago I wrote for several gaming web sites and my pet subjects were false advertising and, more importantly, the EULAs that allow developers to rip-off consumers.
Time and again, developers and publishers made it clear (by their actions) that they didn't want consumers to have any rights, that they wanted to be able to release unfinished, bug-ridden products, and they didn't want to accept any responsibility for fixing their products.
And time and again, consumers said the same thing: That's fine with us!
I can't count the number of flames and hate messages I received in response to the articles I wrote. Thousands? Tens of thousands, more like. Not from developers but from game players. Comments sections of web sites were flooded with the most personal abuse. My inbox filled up with everything from unresearched "you're wrong because blah-blah company r0cks" messages to juvenile death threats. All because I had dared to suggest that consumers should be entitled to products that work as advertised.
Eventually I re-focussed my efforts and most of what I wrote from then on tried to make one point: If you keep telling developers and publishers that you'll forgive them for ripping you off then they'll keep on doing it, and eventually it will reach a stage that you *do* want the situation changed. But by then it will be too late.
Maybe it's too late now?
Often, a particular town's Yellow Pages will have many general practice or personal injury law firms but few to no firms who specialize in a particular kind of case. In addition, not everybody knows how to tell a good attorney from a poor attorney just from a Yellow Pages ad.
... but surely not flamebait. I really do need to know!
...here's mine. I have a system with USB 1.1 on the motherboard. Can I upgrade to 2.0 just by buying a PCI card?
#ifdef SARCASM
Theoretically, you could (that's what those cards are for). But practically, I suggest you sue your mobo manufacturer for not selling you the product you wished you had bought from them. Maybe you could even get a class action going... Suing people seems to be all the rage nowadays, doesn't it?
#endif
Early last year I purchased tkcMail from theKompany.com. At the time I (and many others) purchased this product, the product page stated that IMAP support was "coming soon". That was over a year ago.
Since purchasing the product, I joined the product's mailing list to listen for updates on when to expect IMAP support for the product. I was certainly not the only one complaining. The president of the company would often come on the list and promise its "soon" arrival, often in rather rude wording.
Every so often a developer from the company would appear on the list, telling us it was due out the next week. I believe the last time we heard that was last August.
I and many others tried to get a refund for the product, since we eagerly bought the product in hopes we'd have a useable IMAP client for the Sharp Zaurus and have yet to see it. But we're always promptly reminded that the company website states that sales are "as is". Since the software is downloaded upon purchase, they claim that since there's no way to not have the software, how can they be expect to allow refunds? Good point there, but I still didn't buy that they could advertise a feature as coming soon like they did to bait people into buying something they couldn't get a refund for.
Last November I had just about had enough of the waiting, the lax promises and the rude replies to fair questions on the IMAP feature arrival. I decided to contact the Better Business Beareau of CA and at least hopefully scare them. The replied to the first round of inquiry, then ignored the second. If I understand the BBB, they at least now have a black mark on their record.
The company web page has since removed the claim for IMAP support as a future feature of the product (a wave of the magic Wayback Machine shows the initial state of the page). A scary sight for those of us waiting for that support, but it's actually likely a result of people pointing their fingers at it when demanding a refund.
Sure, we should have all heeded their "as is" policy before buying the product, but isn't there at least something to a sort-of bait-and-switch sorta deal with this? I mean, is there a legal definition for what a company defines as "soon" when promising a future feature? Can an automobile company make a car then, for example, claim on the advertisement that it will run on water as fuel..."soon"? When do they have to make good on that promise?
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
I bought Battlecruiser Millennium, at the time there was no multiplay option available. There was a "multiplayer" option at the main menu, and the reviews of the game that I read online stated that Derek Smart had promised a free multiplay patch when it was available.
I put the game on the shelf for a while and when I started to look into it I saw that you had to buy "Battlecruiser Millennium Gold" to get multiplayer.
At that point I pretty much gave up on it and put the game away. I wish you luck with your class action suit.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Why did you buy the game in the first place if you KNEW that you would not be able to play multi-player at the time of purchase? Where you unable to wait for the patch to come out? You stated in the blurb that the only reason you want the game is for MP and aren't at all interested in the single player mode. You knew before you bought it that, at the time of purchase, you would have no interest in even using it. If I'm buying a car for driving on the road but the tires aren't available for it yet, I'm not going to buy it now versus when the tires are ready. Stupid analogy? You bet. Is it also stupid to buy a game before you can even play it? I think so. It's like buying Sims Online when you don't have internet access... or buying any computer game when you don't own a computer. It makes a hell of a lot more sense to keep the money in the bank and wait until you can actually play the game.
Did the game company illegally market this game and therefore this is a viable lawsuit? I have no idea. Are there too many lawsuits in the U.S. because people don't want to take any responsibility for their own stupid/impatient actions? I have an inkling there are.
IANAL, but I play one on
let me know if this is successful and then we can go take on microsoft!
Your point is somewhat valid. It is true that I did not carefully read the contents on the box. However, having owned the prequel and having had a very good experience with it in terms of support and stability, as well as having been aware of the multiple sources that claimed mp support, such as:
/5.jpg
/Engdemo.jpg
the official website's FAQ prior to the announcement of this lawsuit: http://home.fuse.net/slipstreamscapes/1503AD/Legal
online interview with the game developer:
http://www.gamershell.com/reviews_Anno 1503Intervie w.shtml
(and I quote)
What modes are going to be in this game? And will the gamers be able to play it on-line?
In addition to the tutorial there are a number of different single player missions, an exciting campaign and random generated continuous play games. The multi-player mode can be played over either the Internet or a LAN. This gives players the chance to play against or, in team, with one another.
(end quote)
quicktime video interview with the PR guy:
http://www.fragland.net/index.php?page=newsi tem&ni d=4978
the game's demo outtro screen that speaks of great multiplayer functionality:
http://home.fuse.net/slipstreamsca pes/1503AD/Legal
and finally the fact that the box DID NOT state that it was missing the multiplayer, which should have been a logical course of action considering that they have been touting it all over the place (both officially and unofficially)-- all this has generated in me a sense of TRUST that I was buying a good product without a grain of doubt as to what awaited me.
I was unable to return the game in part because I really liked the prequel and I continued to hope that they would provide the functionality soon (something that has become a rather common occurence in the entertainment software industry where a company releases an incomplete product, literally making impulse buyers essentially their beta testers -- something that they should be also held liable for), and in part because shortly thereafter I left for a vacation and did not have much time to deal with this issue. At the time, there was simply no reason for me to doubt their promise as their past actions and products did not suggest any fowl play.
On the other hand my past experiences have taught me that whenever the company drags their feet on providing a cornerstone feature of their product, that they were never intending to provide one. This, of course, I was unable to ascertain at the time, as it takes time before I can reach this conclusion (kind of a Catch22, if you like). What angers me even more that despite the fact they had been "working" on the multiplayer patch, they somehow never had the time to publish it to us end-users, yet they had plenty of time to release (currently Europe-only) an add-on.
Anyhow, I am ranting away, but hopefully this answers some of your questions and/or concerns.
I would just like to also point out that I am not a litigatious person, as a matter of fact this is the first time in my life that I am exercising the right to sue, despite the fact that I own 200+ game titles, quite a few of which have had similar problems like this one (the game was either unstable and never patched, or simply lacked advertised functionality -- for instance, how many games can you think of that advertise "superb AI" and yet you end-up with the dumbest bots that keep getting stuck in the walls etc.?). Basically, the reason why I opted to pursue this one is because I've had enough of this kind of mistreatment by the game makers/publishers, but also because the publishers of this particular title have been extremely rude towards me, erasing my posts on their boards and banning my account, despite the fact that they did not violate the "rules of the forums," as well as ignoring my polite inquiries.
I've read some (luckilly appropriately rated at 0 and -1) pretty rude replies t
If you don't understand the question, no need to answer it.
Hey... I have a story from 2002 that was 'accepted', but i still haven't seen it posted yet, nor can i find it by searching. Oh well. It's not really an issue for me now.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
you know what else is fun? playing in traffic...
Why oh why didn't I take the purple pill?
Without actual experience with USB cards [I imagine it's similar to adding UART cards were back in the day] the answer is yes. Your onboard ports will still be 1.1 but the new ports [which have their own USB hub thingy] should be.
;-)
Best of all is ask the clerk this question, then ask about a refund if it doesn't work the way he said. Get it all on tape.
If it doesn't work then bring it back. If they refuse play the tape. if they still refuse then get fancy with a bullhorn and play the tape all day long
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Never buy a game on release. I learned this the hard way myself. Wait some months. The good news is, waiting some months on very good/popular games only helps to build the entire thing because the community can grow (check out nwvault.ign.com for never winter nights as an example), AND if you put these months between you and current game releases, you won't be bored anyway because you will always be busy with earlier games.
Works like a charm, and helps avoid crappy games at full price.
I don't know if you will get much relief from your past purchases, but you are doing the right thing by letting the rest of us know how crappy the company is. The next time they come out with a game, drop them an email letting them know why you won't be purchasing it. Or send them a link to this story. "You suck, and here is who knows about it..."
Rather than a suit or other damaging (or disparaging) claims, perhaps an on-line petition , where the company could verify that X% of registered users are dissatisfied might be considered 'constructive criticism,' when compared to a class action lawsuit.
Additionally; it should be made absolytly clear to the comapny that these people have no desire to purchase any further games if they are not MP from the start.
"Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
When will the 1503 A.D. multi-player mode be released?
They say they will have it real soon now. I'd ask to talk to a tester to verify its actual status and to ask for code now, regardless of current bugs, regardless of how soon it'll be out for real.
Their site says "The multi-player (MP) will later be released as a free patch. MP programming has been completed and it is currently being tested. The exact release date still hasn't been decided. We'll be announcing the release on our www.anno1503.com website as soon as the patch is finished."
Ticket ID: WJZ-61269
Subject: anno 1503 multi player mode
Message: Promiced and lack of
ANNO 1503 Multi-Player Mode
is being discussed on SLASHDOT as a cause to sue you (article: 1503AD and the Rapid Erosion of End-User Rights?)
I would have a tester of that promiced patch go on line at slashdot and tell the truth about when it will be available so far as they know.
Maybe provide a patch now even if full of bugs.
There are class action suits against Microsoft in several states. Look up info on those lawsuits and you'll have the names of those lawyers.
I'm still pissed off that the Load/Save Custom Track feature of Nintendo's Excitebike *never* worked, although they advertised that it did.
I think it was a feature that they weren't able to get working before shipping...
Class action lawsuit anyone? (Damn the statue of limitations)
But wait, there is another company even more guilty -- Microsoft! They advertise secure server software, but we all know otherwise....
When you posted your interest in persuing a class-action lawsuit against them were you already within two or three days of having them hit with a summons? No? I didn't think so.
All you have succeeded in doing at this moment is to provide them the opportunity to build their defenses and prepare to destroy you in a court of law.
EA is not a little nobody company. Witihin a few hours or one day of your posting your warcry, they had their lawyers ALL over covering their rear-end.
Sorry this post is somewhat off-topic.
First, I'm part of the politically disenfranchised. I'm very politically aware, but like Diogenes, I scour the polls in vain, in a desperate search for an honest politician. If you're merely making parody for parody's sake, then please forgive the following rant. However, if you're merely a whining liberal who hates any notion of conservatives or any resemblance of limited government, then this rant is specifically for you.
Heaven forbid that I'm not for the distribution of wealth. How can you compare socialism with evolution, heliocentrism, or cosmology? Unchecked greed is not a failure of capitalism; it is the failure of the legal system. When Lenin seized control of a Russia in the midst of change that was a failure of the communist system. While I agree communism is flawed, all of humanity is flawed. I'm greedy, lustful, and full of hubris. I'm naturally lazy. So are you.
The truth is that most of the United States is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. We like the warm fuzzy middle of modern bipolar politics. We are all hypocrites.
I appreciate honest liberals. I may disagree with them, but I appreciate any American's honest discourse. I appreciate the gridlock that juxtaposing dissent provides. The more we argue; the more we strengthen each other's arguments. Frankly, that's the real reason every politician makes a run to the center during election time. It's the one part of the system that works.
What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean my sig is repetitive? What do you mean....
The first thought that popped into my head was "that sucks". The second one was "why the hell would you sue?". Do you have any idea how much of a crackpot/greedy bastard you will look like if you sue a video game company for making false claims? In that case I am looking for a lawyer to take my pro bono case, I am suing EVERY COMPANY THAT HAS SOLD ANYTHING, EVER! They lied to you, plain and simple. Chalk it up to experience, and don't add to our litigation obsessed society, wherein even the slightest infractions is seen as a payday. Rapid erosion of our end-user rights? We have never really had any. You are not buying the software, you buy a license to use the software. It is not your's. This has not stopped people from buying and playing games happily. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly (in this case, purchasing video games) and expecting a different result (every claim delivered, being given more rights, etc).
I hate sigs.
I'm in a class action lawsuit against a TV maker for selling millions of faulty TVs. I paid almost a grand for it. The laywers are getting 6 to 7 million dollars and we are getting a coupon for for 25$ off another crappy TV from this company!
Anonymous Cowards suck.
Now, that I have gained some experience through this ordeal, this is probably one thing that I would have done exactly the way you said it.
Yet, I think I still have a very strong case considering just how convincing evidence I have. Therefore, I am not intending on giving up just yet.
why are 70 % of the people replying to this thread not reading what the poster has written? the box DID state multiplayer according to the poster. Why bag someone for trying to stand up for the rest of us against obviously dodgy practice by a games publisher? how many places do you need to see a feature advertised before you can accept that it is actually implemented? it was "advertised" on the website, in reviews, in demo videos, on the box, etc.
watch "the money masters" on google video