@Gamgee

Anything short of this guy having shared links to places to illegally download copies of Dragon Age 2 on the forums fails to justify it. It was something he posted on those forums even if we decide not to believe him that it was something dissenting he said about EA.

That seems unlikely to me, since he obviously bought it or he wouldn't be having this problem.

I certainly understand your drive to 'get to the bottom of this' though.

You only have his word for it. I'm smelling a liar from miles away at the moment. So I have no idea went down, but there's a good chance we don't have the full story. So why get up in arms?

They're not selling games as much as they're selling something that, with their permission, allows them to play games. And as I've said before, as long as they're not showing up at your house and confiscating what you actually bought, they're entirely in their right. Even if it's probably a bad strategy.

This takes away his ability to play a single player game?

That's ridiculous if true.

I can see banning troublemakers who won't learn their lesson from multiplayer, but NOT single player. Maybe it's my almost 30 years of video games talking, but I can't even conceive how this could be acceptable. Imagine SSI banning me from my C64 version of Pool Of Radiance, or SEGA banning me from my Sonic The Hedgehog cartridge I bought, or Sony banning me from my new Gran Turismo CD, or even Bethesda banning me from Morrowind. I can't imagine it. Seriously I can't, it's just too strange and alien an idea.

No freakin way this should be happening. You bought it and you should be able to play it single player whenever, wherever, in whatever way you want. Even a temporary ban is 100% over the line. Ban him from the forum, but don't ban him from his game. Wtf.

How about Parker Brothers no longer letting you play that Monopoly board game you just bought? If that sounds like a ridiculous anology, step back and think about this: Imagine being banned from the PC Monopoly game you just bought (it's old but it does exist for the PC). The only difference is physical vs digital medium.

Wow I'm angrier over this than I expected.

I also have Stanley Woo's word, a Bioware associate/moderator, that it is possible for someone to be revoked of access to their EA games because of something they say on an EA forum provided it violates the forum's ToS. Read the ToS, Woo links to it. #9 and #11. That's not just Woo's word, it's right in the ToS and you can read it yourself.

I don't think I'm the only person on the face of the planet that would rather not give their money to a company that would produce such a ToS. "Behave yourself on the forums or we won't just ban you, we'll take your games away too." It's outrageous nonsense. That ToS is complete garbage.

Likewise, I wouldn't spend my money in a store that required I was nice to everyone in town, else they'd come to my house and take everything I'd bought from them out of my house. Just because they hang a sign on their door saying that is what they'll do doesn't make it right.

Everything you need to play that game is on the disc you buy. It is PHYSICALLY there, as pits and lands, etched into the various layers of the DVD.

It was people reporting him. Not Bioware, they just banned his forum account. Evidently he got banned from people complaining about him. Hell, I can't even say that. I have no idea, which is why this looks so silly. There's no real evidence one way or the other.

Edit
Why does he even have two accounts? He has v_ware and vware. Was he trolling hardcoe or something and they finally caught him. His avatar does look a little familiar. I think I remember him getting a warning at least once. Like I said, there's more to this than is being told.

Funny how they never seem to advertise it that way, though. Almost as if they know that there are people who wouldn't be interested in such an offer, and thus basically need to be tricked into thinking they're buying something while the company selling it to them is quietly instituting an entirely different deal through technical means. Again, it emphasizes the importance of doing your homework and understanding what you're actually getting- not what the advertising says you're getting, not what the EULA says you're getting, not what the company spokesman says you're getting, but the actual reality of what you're getting.

I don't think they're being tricked as much as that the old ideas of buying a game is so engraved in our minds, even with EULA's (especially since a lot of people never read them and it never backfires on them), that people tend to assume that they're buying a game with little or no strings attached.

What you're buying is their permission to play that game, unless you misbehave on their required website. They should start printing that in large text on their game boxes (I never buy digital-only games unless that's the only way they're offered. It's always physical copies for me. Again, old school).

It's only a matter of time before these ridiculous DRM methods are cracked anyway, and they're bringing it on themselves. It only hurts the honest consumer, and eventually their bottom line.

Hmm EA Community is a blanket set of moderation rules for every game they made. Who's to say he didn't do something else somewhere else? All I know is we're never going to know the truth.

Where else would we get neat maps to put on our walls?

@Gamgee
What is important to me is that it drew attention to their ridiculous ToS.

Yeah the truth is this DRM method is ridiculous and will only scare away honest customers while encouraging piracy.

Is Battlefield 3 EA? If it is I'm staying far far away from it until or unless they change their DRM standards. It's more important to me to not give them any business than it is to enjoy their fun game at the expense of my principles.

EDIT: Yep it's still EA, so I unfortunately have to give them the finger and not buy their game until or unless they change their DRM standards.

THIS!
He could have threatened EA or BIOWARE or both and attempted to pirate the game or worse. There is not enough info of what happened.

Threatening EA or BIOWARE should earn him a ban from their forums, but not from a single player game. Attempting to pirate it would mean he has no problem with actually pirating it after his ban. It may in fact encourage it in a sort of "screw you" move.

I just don't see anything positive whatsoever from this.

Yes, and companies offering alternative deals completely avoid doing anything to give people the idea that the transaction they're engaging in is anything other than a standard sale- hence, tricked. Something important to understand is that in any healthy business transaction both parties should understand what they're getting, and be happy with it. If you're engaging in a transaction and giving the other person the wrong idea about what they're getting, or know that they have the wrong idea about what they're getting and do nothing to correct their perceptions, then you're doing things wrong and it will bite you in the ass. You may come out ahead for that particular transaction for the time being, but the other person is going to be pissed, they're going to tell people about it, and they'll feel no obligation to adhere to the terms of the transaction nor feel any obligation to treat you fairly in any future interactions. Basically you'll have created someone who sees no problem with [censored]ting all over you whenever it suits them.

What is written in the ToS translates into "if you horse around on our forums we believe the best course of action is to ban you from all of our services, including access to all of our games" According to the ToS, violating the ToS in any way is grounds for this kind of treatment. You don't need to have killed somebody's dog.

I wonder, since none of this is probably stated on the box, if someone who's permanently banned can sue them for a refund and have EA pay any court costs and lawyer's fees.

The media and a very specific license is what is being sold in the store. You are purchasing the right to put the companies software on your computer.

There is a separate use license that you must agree to during the installation to actually use the software.

If you refuse to accept, or violate their license, they have every right to deny you access to the software You are still free to install and remove the code and resources to and from your machine as many times as you'd like, and that is what you paid for when you purchased it.

The focus here is not what he did, but what EA can do.

Imagine if I called you a ___ ___ ____ ____ ____ _____ _____ and got myself banned from these forums. Would it be justifiable to also prevent me playing Morrowind and Oblivion, for that same infraction, with no other cause?

Agreed, some people are branwashed, how else could they agree to this. The person paid for the game, its thiers to use as they want, end of.


They are worse than activision.
All thier cut/witheld dlc and now this, even acti dosent sink this low.

How exactly do you threaten EA or Bioware? I'm puzzled by that bit. They are businesses. Not people.

Anyway, he obviously did pay for the game legally or his game and all DLC would all be accessible to him since his account would not be tied to his pirated games. They have cracks for that, like they do with every other form of DRM. Besides, even if this guy is the biggest troll the internet has ever seen and was saying a bunch of hurtful things on the forum, that still does not justify taking away his games or DLC or both, for any length of time.

this guy gets banned for whatever reason,and they make it so he doesn′t get to play a single player game he legally purchased ?
and people defend that kind of actions ?

that just don′t make sense, unreasonable to but it gentle.
of course that wouldn′t happened to me, I never buy anything from ea or ubisoft out of principle,don′t play their games nowadays,and this only assures me I have done the right thing.
actually lost for words here :facepalm:

How can they ban him from playing his games? An internet connection is not required to play any BW games.

That's pretty terrible. He paid for the game, he should be able to play the game; if legal mumbo-jumbo says otherwise, it needs to change.

(Not that I'd touch DA2 with a barge pole anyway.)

That is crossing the line. Banning you from a forum is one thing. Deactivating your ability to play a game is another.

I doubt any court would enforce that provision of the EULA, but the cost of getting into court would be prohibitive.

This is why I don't buy any game that mandates online activation to play or continued play. Too much of a headache.