Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Battlefield 4 Lawsuit

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Files Class Action Suit against Electronic Arts announces a class action suit on behalf of EA shareholders over loss in value caused by Battlefield 4 issues, with portions of the complaint also referencing problems specific to the PS4 edition of the military shooter sequel. GameInformer also notes that another law firm stated last week they were "investigating" similar legal action. Here's part of the complaint in the newer story:

According to the complaint, defendants’ Class Period statements were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose and misrepresented the following adverse facts which were known to or recklessly disregarded by defendants: (a) Battlefield 4 was riddled with bugs and multiple other problems, including downloadable content that allowed players access to more levels of the game, a myriad of connectivity issues, server limitations, lost data and repeated sudden crashes, among other things; (b) as a result, Electronic Arts would not achieve a successful holiday season 2013 rollout of Battlefield 4; (c) the performance of the Electronic Arts unit publishing Battlefield 4 was so deficient that all other projects that unit was involved in had to be put on hold to permit it to focus its efforts on fixing Battlefield 4; and (d) as a result, Electronic Arts was not on track to achieve the financial results it had told the market it was on track to achieve during the Class Period.

View
87 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >

87. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 20, 2013, 05:36 eRe4s3r
 
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 20:00:
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 15:47:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 12:08:
Creston wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 11:24:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 10:57:
Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees.

So you think the system we have is better?? Where trolls just sue people and blackmail settlements out of them because they know people and small business can't afford to go to court?

In our system people can't sue corporations either because their lawyers will drag shit out as long as possible until we can't afford it anymore. In the loser pays system, at least I have some protection from every shitbag who just randomly blackmail-sues people.



I think our system is absolutely better. I'd say it's, without any doubt, the best on the planet.

Is there room for improvement? Yeah. You see improvement routinely, though. It's slow, because change should be slow, but those patent trolls are being pushed out of existence by court rulings. Other changes are way too slow - our court system still has no clue how to deal with anything digital and it's repeatedly pathetic.

As a whole, though, we're still light years ahead of any other nation.

Did you just call the US court system "the best court system ever" ?

Excuse me, while I go laughing manically in a corner somewhere.

Which system do you think is better and what areas do you think it's improved?

Obviously I can only speak for the German court system and the EU courts. Now let me say first, when your government decides it wants to spy on you and use secret courts do validate it, you are LOST. You can't fight against it. When it does this in Germany I can go up to the highest European court and fight against a law, assuming it violates constitution or the "Grundgesetz" as it's called in Germany. You can also sue an entire nation (ie, the government itself) through this, if it violates EU contract law and this directly impacts you in some way. In case of those secret courts, well they would be flat out illega, any decision made by them would be invalid, any validation of any action by anyone through that court would be revoked. The people running this court would also go behind bars, as it's illegal to run secret courts that subvert not just the citizens but a large part of the government as well.

The EU courts, and the German high court don't mess around. If a law is illegal, they void it and give the government a set amount of time to fix the problem. This can be as simple as changing a sentence, but more often than not it means the law itself has to be revoked. More importantly, our high courts are the reason EU citizens have the strongest customer protection laws in the World. We can return any item bought via Internet within 2 weeks without reason and get our money back. Contracts can't apply clauses to your contract if you have never been given a document where that exact clause was in. (And yes, for every good decision you can find one that's not good for citizens, but courts are bound to the law, they can't always interpret something in a good way)

At this point you should realize why that system is absolutely awesome for a citizen of the EU. Of course, it does not protect you against things that are essentially legal in your country, and large political parties can change the "Grundgesetz" with a 75% majority (or was it 66%? nobody ever did that in the time Germany existed)

But in Europe, secret courts you say? I could sue against that before the high courts and win, cost has to be paid by the losing party.

Secondly, if there are legal proceedings against you related to criminal law, you don't have to pay the process costs. Meaning defending against claims is free of charge.

Civil courts on the other hand have much less reach than in the US, so you won't ever see someone have to pay $50m for spilling coffee over some rich money bag.

Is it better? I don't know. But we don't have secret courts, we don't have Guantanamo. Because politicians stand BELOW courts. And the military running their own detention camp somewhere? These people would be in jail faster than you could find the place on the map.

In either case, the German court system is fine as it is. It gets a little bit overzealous at times, but if you get a case before a high court you are sitting in front of judges who are 100% independent from the government. They will speak LAW , not political motivated bullshit. And yes, that means they will sometimes speak law pro government, simply because the basic laws can not interpret a case any other way....

Point is, I'd rather live in the EU than in the US for many various reason, but courts is the primary one ...

Ps.: And yes, civil court system in Germany is hilariously broken, as in, it takes 4+ years for anything to happen. Unless the state wants your money, then it takes 7 years if you go in revision (happened to me) I figure they hoped i'd pay, but I had insurance against lawsuits, for 100€ I could have gone the entire way to the European court (And I won.. sorta )
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
86. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 20, 2013, 02:09 Prez
 
Verno wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 09:04:
ItBurn wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 17:04:
I disagree. Read my previous comments. It'll raise costs, lower innovation and affect negatively good products. The right thing to do is to not buy the bad games... This will have the result you hope for.

I've read your comments and feel that they're incorrectly applied here. This isn't a class action from owners of the game suing EA, this is shareholders suing EA who mislead them about the state of the game prior to release. At the worst this will lead to product delays to ensure products meet some sort of reliability standard before shipping which I can live with. As a consumer I don't care about costs, EA is already passing those costs onto us through revenue tools like DLC and microtransactions anyway. This is not going to lead to some sort of development cost apocalypse, BF4 was a very broken product on several platforms and a special case if I've seen one.

Is this the first time something like this has happened in the game industry? I am trying to think of another instance but I can't remember another where a class-action suit was filed against a company by its shareholders. Anyway it couldn't have happened to a better company. EA sucks.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
85. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 20:00 Beamer
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 15:47:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 12:08:
Creston wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 11:24:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 10:57:
Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees.

So you think the system we have is better?? Where trolls just sue people and blackmail settlements out of them because they know people and small business can't afford to go to court?

In our system people can't sue corporations either because their lawyers will drag shit out as long as possible until we can't afford it anymore. In the loser pays system, at least I have some protection from every shitbag who just randomly blackmail-sues people.



I think our system is absolutely better. I'd say it's, without any doubt, the best on the planet.

Is there room for improvement? Yeah. You see improvement routinely, though. It's slow, because change should be slow, but those patent trolls are being pushed out of existence by court rulings. Other changes are way too slow - our court system still has no clue how to deal with anything digital and it's repeatedly pathetic.

As a whole, though, we're still light years ahead of any other nation.

Did you just call the US court system "the best court system ever" ?

Excuse me, while I go laughing manically in a corner somewhere.

Which system do you think is better and what areas do you think it's improved?
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
84. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 15:47 eRe4s3r
 
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 12:08:
Creston wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 11:24:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 10:57:
Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees.

So you think the system we have is better?? Where trolls just sue people and blackmail settlements out of them because they know people and small business can't afford to go to court?

In our system people can't sue corporations either because their lawyers will drag shit out as long as possible until we can't afford it anymore. In the loser pays system, at least I have some protection from every shitbag who just randomly blackmail-sues people.



I think our system is absolutely better. I'd say it's, without any doubt, the best on the planet.

Is there room for improvement? Yeah. You see improvement routinely, though. It's slow, because change should be slow, but those patent trolls are being pushed out of existence by court rulings. Other changes are way too slow - our court system still has no clue how to deal with anything digital and it's repeatedly pathetic.

As a whole, though, we're still light years ahead of any other nation.

Did you just call the US court system "the best court system ever" ?

Excuse me, while I go laughing manically in a corner somewhere.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
83. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 15:25 Ryan Lange
 
Asmo wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 16:57:
If it succeeds, it puts companies on notice that products rushed out the door without due attention to Q&A could come back to bite them in the ass where they actually care about, the bottom line.

I suspect a bunch of developers are pressured by their publishers to release their game before it's ready, so I generally have sympathy for those poor code monkeys when their game gets trashed for being extremely buggy.

If this lawsuit succeeds, future developers can maybe point to it as a sort of, "Fuck off," when they're put under any outside pressure from publishers or shareholders.

Of course, I seriously doubt this suit has any chance of succeeding. I don't even know if there are any actual shareholders on board, or if this was just a suit that this law firm filed and are hoping to attract shareholders.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
82. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 15:09 Ryan Lange
 
ItBurn wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 14:47:
A dev makes a bad game, you just don't buy it. Don't buy it... It's simple. Let the dev die by himself because of lack of sales. No need to sue and end up raising dev costs and lowering innovation while causing potential issues for actual good games.

This is class action for shareholders, not people who bought the game.

Shareholders have already bought into the company. They can't really avoid situations like this ahead of time, unless the company is being honest with their shareholders about the poor quality of the product they're about to release. (Part of this suit is, apparently, that EA knew BF4 had serious problems and wasn't informing their shareholders.)

And if that company knowingly releases a poor quality game that ends up devaluing its shares, that's a willful violation of their obligations to their shareholders. Something the company can definitely be sued for.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
81. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 14:54 Ryan Lange
 
Wallshadows wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 12:43:
Good. I hope EA management gets buried by all this bad publicity and sends a message across the industry that such shitty releases can produce more issues than having to extend the release date of a game.

Couldn't have happened to a better company. I don't even give a shit if the whole thing is a farce.

Uhh... If it's a farce, then how is it sending that message?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
80. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 12:08 Beamer
 
Creston wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 11:24:
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 10:57:
Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees.

So you think the system we have is better?? Where trolls just sue people and blackmail settlements out of them because they know people and small business can't afford to go to court?

In our system people can't sue corporations either because their lawyers will drag shit out as long as possible until we can't afford it anymore. In the loser pays system, at least I have some protection from every shitbag who just randomly blackmail-sues people.



I think our system is absolutely better. I'd say it's, without any doubt, the best on the planet.

Is there room for improvement? Yeah. You see improvement routinely, though. It's slow, because change should be slow, but those patent trolls are being pushed out of existence by court rulings. Other changes are way too slow - our court system still has no clue how to deal with anything digital and it's repeatedly pathetic.

As a whole, though, we're still light years ahead of any other nation.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
79. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 11:24 Creston
 
Beamer wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 10:57:
Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees.

So you think the system we have is better?? Where trolls just sue people and blackmail settlements out of them because they know people and small business can't afford to go to court?

In our system people can't sue corporations either because their lawyers will drag shit out as long as possible until we can't afford it anymore. In the loser pays system, at least I have some protection from every shitbag who just randomly blackmail-sues people.


 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
78. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 10:57 Beamer
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 05:35:
Beamer wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 18:59:
Big companies are diverse enough to be able to take a lawsuit. Indies would have to close at even the hint of one, as they don't even have the financial resources to mount a defense, let alone win.

And there you have it. All that is wrong with the 'western' legal system summed up in two sentences. Justice is in the pockets of those who wield the more expensive lawyers...Humanity at its greatest!

It still beats the 'eastern' legal system, or whatever alternatives you think are out there. Do you know that, in many countries, the loser has to pay the winner's court fees, so you can't even fucking sue a corporation because, if you lose, you have to pay their fees. No one in the UK will bother because, on that small chance they lose, they'd be bankrupt.

But hey, let's all say the 'western' US system is evil!
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
77. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 09:38 eRe4s3r
 
Creston wrote on Dec 19, 2013, 01:37:
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 16:21:
Ah you are right... Release version was 1.10 - first 0-day ~.~ patch was 1.12 .. so 10 patches

Nine patches.

And don't go nitpicking, I need my hyperbole when I talk about Rebirth, still not over that pos game.

That's fine, but like I said, the game is bad enough it doesn't need it. You can easily point out everything that's broken and have it make a clear enough statement about how terrible it is.

I was going to play it again after a month, but it's still broken, so eh. Maybe I'll play it next year. :-shrug-:

Hyperbole is my coping mechanism when I am really really unhappy about something I bought. If you read my posts before about Rebirth you know I waited a long time for this game, and I was super hyped. But I guess that's only fitting, as the X3 games that I considered good (TC, Extra Patch, AP), were largely not made by Egosoft, but rather by modders. Half the features in AP were NOT made by egosoft. That's just.. telling.. and based on that my hype state was my own fault I guess. I can't say there weren't signs.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
76. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 09:04 Verno
 
ItBurn wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 17:04:
I disagree. Read my previous comments. It'll raise costs, lower innovation and affect negatively good products. The right thing to do is to not buy the bad games... This will have the result you hope for.

I've read your comments and feel that they're incorrectly applied here. This isn't a class action from owners of the game suing EA, this is shareholders suing EA who mislead them about the state of the game prior to release. At the worst this will lead to product delays to ensure products meet some sort of reliability standard before shipping which I can live with. As a consumer I don't care about costs, EA is already passing those costs onto us through revenue tools like DLC and microtransactions anyway. This is not going to lead to some sort of development cost apocalypse, BF4 was a very broken product on several platforms and a special case if I've seen one.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Divinity Original Sin, Infamous Second Son, Madden
Watching: Spartan, Possible Worlds, The Changeling
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
75. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 05:35 InBlack
 
Beamer wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 18:59:
Big companies are diverse enough to be able to take a lawsuit. Indies would have to close at even the hint of one, as they don't even have the financial resources to mount a defense, let alone win.

And there you have it. All that is wrong with the 'western' legal system summed up in two sentences. Justice is in the pockets of those who wield the more expensive lawyers...Humanity at its greatest!
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
74. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 01:37 Creston
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 16:21:
Ah you are right... Release version was 1.10 - first 0-day ~.~ patch was 1.12 .. so 10 patches

Nine patches.

And don't go nitpicking, I need my hyperbole when I talk about Rebirth, still not over that pos game.

That's fine, but like I said, the game is bad enough it doesn't need it. You can easily point out everything that's broken and have it make a clear enough statement about how terrible it is.

I was going to play it again after a month, but it's still broken, so eh. Maybe I'll play it next year. :-shrug-:
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
73. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 19, 2013, 00:14 Frags4Fun
 
publicENEMY wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 18:33:
Frags4Fun wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 15:48:
I think that many of you are missing the point of the lawsuit.

It seems to me that EA is being sued because they deliberately mislead the shareholders about the state that the game was in when it shipped and NOT because of the loss in profits. The loss in profits is a direct result of EA misleading people whose money is on the line. I doubt that anyone could sue for lost profits, but misleading investors or shareholders is a completely different ball of wax.

Edit: I would guess that their motivation is the lost profits, but the route that they are taking appears to be based on being mislead.

Dont be naive. Its all about the money. "misleading investors or shareholders" is only an excuse. Would shareholder sue EA if BF4 making lots of profits while EA screwing their(shareholder) wife/mistress?

How can you say that I'm being naive and then go on and repeat what I said? /scratcheshead Of course it's all about the money and it's only an excuse. I think everyone here knows that. Their motivations don't matter to me. The outcome might though.

That being said, they have a pretty good case if they can prove that they were mislead. If they can't prove it then this will all blow over. If EA did in fact lie to them and say the game was ready to go when it clearly wasn't, then they should be held accountable.

I totally understand that investments are almost always a crap shoot BUT, if a company knowingly misleads people in order to get an investment from them, that is a crime. Proving that this scenario happened might not be so easy to do unless they have recorded meetings with transcribed conversations, which most big companies do these days.

What really matters is that these companies have been releasing products which are more and more broken every year and nobody is holding them accountable. I for one would welcome the "when it's done" standard that we once enjoyed. Polished at launch is a thing of the past and it's frustrating. I see many of you guys, including myself, complaining about various games being broken at launch and now someone is trying to do something about it and a bunch of you suddenly turn into apologists. I don't get it.

People are saying that this will hurt the industry but that's so far from the truth. This will reinstate a little thing called accountability. If these companies don't want to be sued, maybe they should stop bullshitting the consumers and their investors. Are people really wanting this to go away so companies like EA can continue to rip people off? Hold them accountable. If they were honest and said that that game would be delayed, this would not be happening. They chose to lie through their teeth and now they should pay for those lies. This is exactly why America is in shambles. People lie, cheat, and steal and nobody is held accountable any more except for us little guys.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that investors should be able to sue if their investment fails. That would be beyond stupid. All I'm saying is that these companies need to learn a thing or two about honor and integrity, which I'm 100% sure they make each and every one of their new hires learn about when they are going through orientation. If they break the deal, they face the wheel. If they were honest, this would not and could not be taking place, Period.

When did lying to people, with zero consequences, become exceptable anyways? I know it's a common thing but it doesn't mean that we should tolerate it. We should strive for better.

/rant

This comment was edited on Dec 19, 2013, 00:37.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
72. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 18, 2013, 20:18 HorrorScope
 
Who really invests in EA anyway? Do you do research?  
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
71. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 18, 2013, 19:01 Jackplug
 
They mislead everyone in thinking BF4 was playable, now they will pay. Everyone who has major problems with BF4 will never buy another from Dice, so in many ways its an end game for them.

No dedicated servers, no map editor for modders, noone gives a shit about em now. In my eyes they can rot, since BF3 I lost my interest in them.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
70. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 18, 2013, 18:59 Beamer
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 17:25:
Beamer wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 15:04:
It's not something you really want the law to be involved in. ItBurn is right, once that happens, companies stop taking risks.

Public/corporate one's perhaps. I'm ready in the case the AAA budget games fail to exist.

Uh huh. And with people already claiming, on this board, that Chris Roberts should be sued because a demo is going to be delayed, you don't think that would hit indies even harder? Big companies are diverse enough to be able to take a lawsuit. Indies would have to close at even the hint of one, as they don't even have the financial resources to mount a defense, let alone win.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
69. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 18, 2013, 18:46 xXBatmanXx
 
huh? The investors are suing a product they invested in that they say is failing? (investors = shareholders)

SO FUCKING WHAT@! THAT IS WHY IT IS AN INVESTMENT! YOU MIGHT NOT GET YOUR MONEY BACK THAT YOU MAGICALLY THING YOU ARE OWED!

ugh.....I can't even put into words how stupid this is.
 
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
68. Re: Battlefield 4 Lawsuit Dec 18, 2013, 18:33 publicENEMY
 
Frags4Fun wrote on Dec 18, 2013, 15:48:
I think that many of you are missing the point of the lawsuit.

It seems to me that EA is being sued because they deliberately mislead the shareholders about the state that the game was in when it shipped and NOT because of the loss in profits. The loss in profits is a direct result of EA misleading people whose money is on the line. I doubt that anyone could sue for lost profits, but misleading investors or shareholders is a completely different ball of wax.

Edit: I would guess that their motivation is the lost profits, but the route that they are taking appears to be based on being mislead.

Dont be naive. Its all about the money. "misleading investors or shareholders" is only an excuse. Would shareholder sue EA if BF4 making lots of profits while EA screwing their(shareholder) wife/mistress?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
87 Replies. 5 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo