Anybody else get the EA class-action email?

[Dobie]

Linky (http://view.exacttarget.com/?j=fe6410707d65067d761d&m=fecb15707d61047b&ls=fdf11273746d057a76127671&l=fe5b16797165057a7211&s=fe3012717061007f771674&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe2516747762007f7d1c76&r=0)

Not sure how I feel about this... EA has a monopoly, sure. But I knew what I was paying for when I bought it. This kind of thing does directly affect funding for other games were they to lose, I stand to gain maybe a few bucks IF it wins. Feels like a couple lawyers trying to make a financial gain off the backs of "wronged" gamers. Any opinions? Right now I'm leaning towards NOT participating.

[kupomogli]

Yeah. I don't think you should. Everyone knows the deal when they buy EA's sports titles. They're pretty much the next season every game. If you do join the class action lawsuit, you'll probably get possibly up to $60 or so dollars while whoever started the suit as well as the lawyers get a couple hundred thousand if it wins. It's in their best interests that other people join. I just don't see the point of it, because like you said, it'll just cut into the budget of whatever else they're working on.

Now if it was a class action lawsuit against Activision about how many bugs there were in a game like Black Ops that seems it never even went through testing and was patched when they started receiving complaints. Then yeah. I'd say go for it. Because this is a more deserving class action lawsuit as the gamers are getting overcharged for a game that is poorly developed. I don't own Black Ops so don't know, but I haven't heard more complaining about a game than it had.

[Dobie]

I'm not even sure compensation would be $60. If I recall the GTA Hot Coffee lawsuit correctly, people who participated only got $5-15. I was not one of those who were part of that suit either.

[old_skoolin_jim]

I don't own Black Ops so don't know, but I haven't heard more complaining about a game than it had.

You just rendered your "point" irrellevant. Maybe you should actually, I don't know... PLAY a game before you decide to trash it? Just sayin'.

[Oobgarm]

Case sounds like BS to me. At no time were their sports game above the standard "going rate" for new software, barring collector's editions and similar.

[kupomogli]

You just rendered your "point" irrellevant. Maybe you should actually, I don't know... PLAY a game before you decide to trash it? Just sayin'.

I've played the game multiplayer(online) at a friends home so I've played it if you want to say that but I haven't noticed anything during the times that I've played. So yes. I have played it. However, I do not own the game and have no plans to. Meaning that my time with the game is certainly not enough to see the problems with the game. It's easily noticeable online everywhere, you look you hear Black Ops has online problems. My best friend who put a lot of time into it complains about the glitches on the online mode.

So it's "fact" that it's the most complaining I've heard about for a single game. Because I didn't experience its problems first hand during the time I've played it doesn't make this any less true. So no. The point is not irrelevant.

[NoahsMyBro]

I see your point, but I do believe gamers interested in videogame football software were harmed in general due to EA's monopolistic behavior. Whether or not this harm was substantial enough to merit any sort of lawsuit or punishment is arguable, but I'm not talking about that right now.

Before EA shut out other software developers there *were* legitimate competing football videogames available in the market. That is fact.

Another fact is that the other games were substantially less expensive to purchase. Sega's 2k Sports games were $20, not $60, if I recall correctly. I thought those games were very good too, and I was sorry to see them go.

Back to the lawsuit - I don't know whether EA should be punished for their actions or whether or not I'd participate in the suit. In my case I exercised my right to just not buy anything from EA. I wish I could have purchased future NFL 2kx games, but that's life. Just another $20 spent on music CDs instead. Life goes on.

[StoneAgeGamer]

I haven't bought a new football game since I bought ESPN NFL 2K5 for XBOX. I refuse to be forced to buy Madden to play a NFL game.

This is not just EA's fault. Its the NFL's. The NFL put the exclusive rights up for bid knowing very well EA would get them. Whether this was done by pressure from EA or not we will probably never know.

I heard the NFL was very unhappy with Sega for the $20 price tag. They claimed it devalued their product (NFL football). However its obvious what Sega was attempting to do. Offer 2K5 for cheap to get some fan boys to try something different and in my and many other's opinion the superior product. I highly doubt Sega planned on offering the NFL2K series for only $20 forever.

This was one time Sega did try to do something right and even when doing something right they got royally screwed. NFL2K was the bread and butter of the 2K sports games. Seeing the writing on the wall they sold everything to Take Two.

Its sad because competition brings out the best and because of the NFL2K series it caused EA to really make a better Madden game. Now whats the incentive? The fan boys and football addicts will just continue to buy Madden like zombies.

Regarding the lawsuit: both EA and the NFL are well within their rights to do what they did, so I am unsure what the point is.

[Frankie_Says_Relax]

I don't play football games, but clearly if a company puts exclusive rights to a brand on the table and a software company can afford to buy that exclusivity - if the FTC doesn't have a problem with that monopoly, I don't see what EA did wrong or illegal.

I mean, I GET that people have been frustrated for many years over this deal, but I'm not sure what the civil suit is going to bring about.

Also, isn't the exclusivity deal actually ending soon? (I read it was going to be up but the forthcoming labor strike in the NFL only temporarily extended it.)

[Nature Boy]

I do believe gamers interested in videogame football software were harmed in general due to EA's monopolistic behavior.

I think that's ludicrous. Somebody spending disposable income on a video game *can not* be harmed in any way, shape, or form - unless of course they got trampled during a Black Friday sale or something.

I can't see this succeeding. Wouldn't the success of this potentially lead to class action suits based on movie licenses next? They only go to one publisher too...

[Sysop]

Now if it was a class action lawsuit against Activision about how many bugs there were in a game like Black Ops that seems it never even went through testing and was patched when they started receiving complaints. Then yeah. I'd say go for it. Because this is a more deserving class action lawsuit as the gamers are getting overcharged for a game that is poorly developed. I don't own Black Ops so don't know, but I haven't heard more complaining about a game than it had.
I've played the game, and I can't find any flaws with it at all. Please could you list some examples before you claim it is bugged?

[98redM6]

I've played the game, and I can't find any flaws with it at all. Please could you list some examples before you claim it is bugged?

I think he forgot to mention that this occurs when playing online. The servers and game seem to be inadequate for smooth and enjoyable gameplay.

[Sysop]

I think he forgot to mention that this occurs when playing online. The servers and game seem to be inadequate for smooth and enjoyable gameplay.
I'd consider them to be quite reasonable, at least for the Xbox 360 version of the game. The Playstation 3 and PC versions might not be as good though.

[TonyTheTiger]

The thing is, EA doesn't, and never did, have a monopoly. At least not any more than other perfectly legal exclusive agreements dealing with other properties. Anybody could still make a football game. It's just that EA had an exclusive license with the NFL and NFLPA.

This is no different than, say, if a publisher got an exclusive license to the Marvel or DC universes of characters. Anybody could still go out and make action games or whatnot, but (insert company) would be the only one with the rights to do so with Spider-Man, Batman, etc. There's no genuine offense here. Identical scenarios happen all the time with other companies/properties and nobody ever bats an eye.

And even if there were something fishy going on, EA was just the highest bidder. It was the NFL that put the exclusivity offer on the table in the first place. So there's huge misdirection going on with respect to this.

[NayusDante]

Yeah, they just have the valuable licenses. There's nothing stopping anyone from making a football game that doesn't feature those leagues, and there's several examples of this. Just look at Mutant Lea... oh wait.

[Hep038]

All-Pro Football. Case closed.

[TonyTheTiger]

Konami published International Superstar Soccer without the official players and most people will say it rocked despite the intentionally misspelled names.