EA now issuing permanent Origin bans through content filter

[II2]

I was trying to type something witty, but I can't even figure a joke out of this.

I feel scorn and disgust at EA, their services, their advertisements, their business practices and a deep sense of concern that efforts of Bioware and DICE (others as well) are under their purview.

Maxtaco, you have my sympathy and wishes for a quick, placating resolution, for what idle words are worth.

 

[MaximumTacos]

I just had a great idea for a phonecall to EA support. Can you guys help me compile a list of every single profanity you can hear in the multiplayer portion of BF2?

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

I'm really not looking forward to being forced to use Origin to play Mass Effect 3 or Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Y'know, I get it that they're doing the same thing that Valve does with Steam and games like Half-Life 2. I completely understand that arguement. But at least, from my experiences and the experiences of pretty much everyone I've ever spoken to on the subject, Steam doesn't actively screw over its users like Origin does. Between the forum perma-bans locking people out of games that they've purchased and a program defined by many, including the German government, as spyware... I dunno... it just seems like a hell of a lot more of a headache than Steam ever was.

 

[MaximumTacos]

I'm really not looking forward to being forced to use Origin to play Mass Effect 3 or Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Y'know, I get it that they're doing the same thing that Valve does with Steam and games like Half-Life 2. I completely understand that arguement. But at least, from my experiences and the experiences of pretty much everyone I've ever spoken to on the subject, Steam doesn't actively screw over its users like Origin does. Between the forum perma-bans locking people out of games that they've purchased and a program defined by many, including the German government, as spyware... I dunno... it just seems like a hell of a lot more of a headache than Steam ever was.

Zee GERMANS think origin is spyware?

Ok, I don't have anything funny to top that with at all.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

Zee GERMANS think origin is spyware?

Ok, I don't have anything funny to top that with at all.

Yeah, I read it a while back in news posts both here on the Escapist and on Kotaku. I guess the wording of the EULA for Origin was so incredibly vague as to what the program was allowed to monitor on your PC that the German government found it to be an invasion of its citizens' privacy.

I also remember reading about German stores offering customers full refunds on copies of Battlefield 3 (including PC versions that had already had their CD keys used) in light of the whole privacy concern issue.

 

[Lunar Templar]

this is about as surprising as the sun coming up in the morning

otherwise I'm inclined to believe that your story is pretty much lying and trying to turn popular opinion against EA and Origin (not a hard feat either) since you're upset you broke the rules and got punished.

riddle me this: how do you turn an opinion against a company that is already considered to be shit.

 

[jthwilliams]

So it is your opinion that private companies should inact codes of conduct based on well whatever the hell the feel like and then inforce those codes of conduct with real financial consiquences without a judicial review process and oversight?

It is my opinion that people should actually bother to agree with things they click "I Agree" too, and that in a private company's private property (forums, online services, etc) they should be able to demand semi decent conduct.

fair enough. But it feels like there should be some 3rd party abritrator involved. I mean I don't mind if they ban someone for antisocial behavior, but I worry about them being able to define antisocial behavior and for there to be no oversight or appeals process from a nutreal 3rd party. After all they already have your money, and if they decide to ban you from their system, they could potentially be taking hundreds or thousands of dolars of content from you without any need to proove you actually violated anything. It is just to self serving for them to take your money and ban you.

 

[MaximumTacos]

Well, great. Before I could at least log in and click on the title of my game to get a "not allowed" message(F you, battlelog):

This happened not long after I emailed Andrew Wong of EA customer service.

Coincidence?

 

[Versuvius]

I wonder what kind of fallout will come of this...Hey, Anon! Got a target here! Well. The few segments of Anon that kinda rock.

 

[Lilani]

Well, great. Before I could at least log in and click on the title of my game to get a "not allowed" message(F you, battlelog):

-image snip-

This happened not long after I emailed Andrew Wong of EA customer service.

Coincidence?

First of all, that picture had me thoroughly confused. I don't even have an origins account, so I was trying to figure out why there was a prompt for it on my screen.

Second of all...I really don't know. Maybe it's just another part of their banning process? It wouldn't surprise me how low EA would stoop at this point, though. It's astounding how hard they try to run off the people who are voluntarily giving them money.

 

[MaximumTacos]

I just social engineered my way through EA's phone tree to Andrew Wong's office, the one who is quoted in one of the news articles as saying that they don't intend to be banning people from games over forum posts and that it will be fixed.

He was surprised to receive a call from Cave Johnson, CEO of Portal Industries, asking for confirmation of singleplayer bans over forum TOS violations, but informed Mr. Johnson that he is in an entirely different department and has no control over anything involved.

I want to call bullshit but according to John Dies at the End, Wong is the most common name in the world, so I may have reached the wrong Wong.

 

[gmergurl]

and this is why Steam rules, honestly though, if you paid for the game, and didn't read the "ToS" you might be out of luck, because it can totally say "ToS apply to forums and if you mess up there, we'll steal your game privledges" because like movies, you don't actually "own the game" as far as I know, you are merely buying the liscense to have a copy... or some technical terms like that. As such, they can draw up the basic guidelines of what you can and cannot do.

How does the TOS make Steam any better? If you read the Steam TOS, they too have the "We can cancel your access at any time, for whatever reason we want to make up" clause, and a "Maybe we'll give you stand-alone copies of your purchased games, maybe we won't. Depends on our mood" clause.

That this hasn't happened on Steam (or if it has, it didn't get publicized like EAs string of screwups) has nothing to do with the TOS. Valve could do exactly the same thing and be entirely in their rights, according to the TOS.

Steam/Valve is better because they don't do stuff like this. I'm sure they have to have clauses like those to save their own hides from being sued for piracy (hey, we all know game makers are greedy sobs...)

I'm not saying they won't do these things in the future (though most likely not) I merely mentioned the ToS because the OP might not have any real case. If he agreed to ToS that basically allowed EA to do what ever they want with his games, then he's out of luck, nothing any lawyers or 3rd parties can do. All he can hope for is to complain loudly (if he truly isn't at fault in some way shape or form) and hope enough voices/eyes see/hear what EA's doing to actually put a dent in their profit margin, because that's all they are going to listen to.

However, I highly doubt that this will do that. People will still buy from EA simply because they want the game, nevermind what they are supporting with their wallets. Seriously, do you think EA cares if they lose 1 customer? That's what? $60 a year to them? It'll take about 100 thousand or more for people to stop buying, be able to tell EA why they aren't buying for any real changes to be made. That or a government intervention, and as a supporter of government free commerce, no to that. Honestly, you think you'd all be bored of the same shooters repackaged for you in a new box every two years (/troll bait).

Off topic: Stop with the troll hate guys, it's the internet, stop taking everything so darn personal.

 

[MaximumTacos]

If you guys want to help with spreading this, I put link to this thread on Reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield3/comments/my2c5/suspension_from_battlelog_forums_origin_ban/

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not saying they won't do these things in the future (though most likely not) I merely mentioned the ToS because the OP might not have any real case.

The problem is, the TOS are very similar, and you brought them up. Valve reserves the right to do the same, so saying "this is why steam rules; read the TOS" is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Versuvius]

I'm not saying they won't do these things in the future (though most likely not) I merely mentioned the ToS because the OP might not have any real case.

The problem is, the TOS are very similar, and you brought them up. Valve reserves the right to do the same, so saying "this is why steam rules; read the TOS" is pretty ridiculous.

But Steam -doesn't- unless you really go out of your way. Thats the thing. They have a very good standing in the gaming community because they are for the most part fair and generous. EA not so much. Even if you cheat, VAC kicks you out of VAC protected things, not steals your products from you.
TROLLOPE elynju. Huh. Well then, captcha.

 

[gmergurl]

The problem is, the TOS are very similar, and you brought them up. Valve reserves the right to do the same, so saying "this is why steam rules; read the TOS" is pretty ridiculous.

Okay, should I edit my first post to make it clearer? I did not say "Steam rules, read the ToS." I didn't even say "steam rules; read the ToS" I said "Steam rules, but that sucks that happened to you. However you should read the ToS to make sure you have a case."

Valve might reserve the right to do the same, but they don't. It's the technical equivalent to "walk silently but carry a big stick." They have the right/means to smack you, but they don't unless you need to, and based on the amount of Steam complaints I've seen (which is none btw, I mean they might be out there, haven't seen them myself).

Like I said, Steam and Origin (well maybe not Origin if it only deals in EA games which since I've never been interested in Origin no idea) but Steam probably needs that clause so they don't get sued over "aiding piracy" or something like that should one of their users abuse them and someone steal games/copies/etc. Are they ever going to ban you over forum issues even though they have the "right?" Highly depends on the severity of the situation but my money will be on "no" for most of the time in small cases. Has Steam ever had dodgey practices? Not that I'm aware of. Has Steam ever had a huge player outrage over policies? Again, not that I'm aware of. Now I'll admit that I'm a pc gamer newbie, only been on the scene for about a year or so now so I can easily not be aware of something. As a general practice I only buy from companies that I trust, since I no longer trust EA, I no longer purchase their products or services.

However, I stand by the fact that my "Steam rules" comment and my "read the ToS" comment were meant to be taken separately and one did not cause the other in any sort of way.

 

[jthwilliams]

The problem is, the TOS are very similar, and you brought them up. Valve reserves the right to do the same, so saying "this is why steam rules; read the TOS" is pretty ridiculous.

Okay, should I edit my first post to make it clearer? I did not say "Steam rules, read the ToS." I didn't even say "steam rules; read the ToS" I said "Steam rules, but that sucks that happened to you. However you should read the ToS to make sure you have a case."

Valve might reserve the right to do the same, but they don't. It's the technical equivalent to "walk silently but carry a big stick." They have the right/means to smack you, but they don't unless you need to based on the amount of Steam complaints I've seen (which is none btw, I mean they might be out there, haven't seen them myself).

Like I said, Steam and Origin (well maybe not Origin if it only deals in EA games which since I've never been interested in Origin no idea) but Steam probably needs that clause so they don't get sued over "aiding piracy" or something like that should one of their users abuse them and someone steal games/copies/etc. Are they ever going to ban you over forum issues even though they have the "right?" Highly depends on the severity of the situation but my money will be on "no" for most of the time in small cases. Has Steam ever had dodgey practices? Not that I'm aware of. Has Steam ever had a huge player outrage over policies? Again, not that I'm aware of. Now I'll admit that I'm a pc gamer newbie, only been on the scene for about a year or so now so I can easily not be aware of something. As a general practice I only buy from companies that I trust, since I no longer trust EA, I no longer purchase their products or services.

However, I stand by the fact that my "Steam rules" comment and my "read the ToS" comment were meant to be taken separately and one did not cause the other in any sort of way.

Actually the TOS may not matter. You can't waive your right to fraud protection. Also electronic signing of Terms and Conditions is open to debate.

 

[Tuesday Night Fever]

Seriously, do you think EA cares if they lose 1 customer? That's what? $60 a year to them? It'll take about 100 thousand or more for people to stop buying, be able to tell EA why they aren't buying for any real changes to be made.

You do have a point there...

...BUT...

...the thing is that it's rapidly getting to be an old way of thinking. With mass communication as easy as it is today, that one person can fairly easily reach 100 thousand or more other people. Hell, this topic alone as of the time I'm writing this has 7343 views, and I don't think the person who started it had the specific intention of spreading the word far and wide. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that, MaximumTacos, but I imagine that if you had the intention to you could get this seen by a whole lot more people without too much difficulty.

If even a fraction of the people who see the story decide to stop supporting EA, that's still a reasonable hit to EA's business from just one person's experience. And that experience could potentially be spread even further by the people who read it. And that's just one person's experience, multiply it by the number of people EA is screwing over, and it adds up pretty quickly.

Now - whether or not people actually ACT on their claims to boycott EA Origin is a different story. Just saying that the potential actually does exist, and isn't that outlandish for this kind of bad publicity to not only get EA's attention, but also damage their profits.

 

[MaximumTacos]

Now at 7.5k views and climbing.. I still have roughly $50 in google adwords credit.

Should I start buying links to this thread for searches on BF3?

 

[Starke]

Now at 7.5k views and climbing.. I still have roughly $50 in google adwords credit.

Should I start buying links to this thread for searches on BF3?

That would be amusing, though potentially problematic.