EA Brings Back its Harsh Beta EULA

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

I predicted that EA won't survive past this year a year ago. It's as if EA wants me to be correct.

That's a shame. I wish there was a devils advocate approach I could take but... I don't see this as anymore then a company not willing to pay for more of the professional bug busting they do before beta versions. Seriously though why does EA punish their loyal customers again and again? At this point their older games like Sims 2 and Sim City 4 are more appealing then their nickle and dimeing successors which will all eventually require Origins and a EULA that lets them steal from you the products you bought if you in anyway piss off EA.

Ranorak:

Metalrocks:
im always amazed how they keep them selfs alive. why dont they change their slogan to
"€A: do you hate us already?"

I thought that's what "EA GAMES; Challenge everything" mend!

OT: It's getting really really hard to take anything EA does seriously at this point.
I mean, they must know how people feel about them, right?

"EA: fucking our fans professionally."

Ranorak:

Metalrocks:
im always amazed how they keep them selfs alive. why dont they change their slogan to
"€A: do you hate us already?"

I thought that's what "EA GAMES; Challenge everything" mend!

OT: It's getting really really hard to take anything EA does seriously at this point.
I mean, they must know how people feel about them, right?

i think they know. and i think they want to be hated or enjoy being hated. thats why they use other companies to do their dirty work because they know that people will more likely buy it.
look at BF games. BF4 will be a huge success. i still enjoy BF3.

"Oh the scandal is over lets sneak that part we were forced to remove in again, noone would notice right?"
The perfect plan from EA.

And yet another reason for me to buy no games from EA. yay?
I mean what if i found a bug by accident, didnt notice it and jsut kept on playing normally? i would get banned? yay?

Also, there were 4 EA related news in couple hours. whats gonig on, EA PR is on rampage again?

Skim read this thread, not surprised to see the usual anti-EA knee-jerking going on.

Seriously people... its not really that hard to grasp. They've included a worst-case scenario for worst-case offenders so they have a legal stance to fall back on. When you consider how tied to online the new Sim City is, the last thing they want is a beta tester finding an exploit that allows them to ruin the game (particularly for other players) and deliberately not tell EA about it to fix it (ie, the job you're supposed to be doing).

This isn't some clause to have a go at people who forget to submit a report, or decline to refile a bug already filed. Its simply their to cover themselves and to serve as a reminder to the testers.

If Valve were to do this, we'd hear what a great idea it was.

GoldenShadow:
Its just Sim City, who cares if you cheat. It probably has built in cheat codes too.

The only build in cheat codes that still exist come in the form of on-disc DLC

I don't know. Can we play this just yet.

I mean I am expecting devil horns to pop out on their logo any moment now.

Why does a game company have that kind of control in the first place?

Zachary Amaranth:
If Valve were to do this, we'd hear what a great idea it was.

That's right!
And why would we hear that? Because Valve is a great company.
And why is Valve a great company? Because they don't do this kind of s**t.

Your statement is like saying "If they'd have divided by zero...". It just does not work.

Well I see the stick, now where's the carrot?

I understand that since beta testers aren't being paid you need an incentive to get them to do the work, but I think they should be told 'you catch more flies with honey than vinegar'. So instead of threats for failing to report bugs, why not rewards for reporting them?

Comedy gold.

EA take their testers for granted and shit on everything that doesn't help them meet their quota.

Nothing new, except that they once again prove that game companies should NOT have the power of banning you from your games.
This whole lease thing is way out of control and does nothing but provoke people to pirate their games.

As usual, I shall continue my boycott against EA and their shit platform, Origin.

EA just love shooting themselves in the foot don't they?

I've pretty much avoided EA where I can and I've avoided Origin altogether. But SimCty had me wanting it despite these things and I was willing to have a go at the beta and see what I could find... not anymore...

Zachary Amaranth:
If Valve were to do this, we'd hear what a great idea it was.

Maybe, but Valve didn't. EA did.

Valok:
image
Oh EA, you never ceases to amuse me.

The way I see it, I always win! Either game developers do a good job and I get good games, or game developers create comedy gold.

Vault101:
say...anyone remember a bugs life? no one seems too

In an odd coincidence[1] I was playing D&D with some friends of mine yesterday and a bugs life came up.

Life's funny that way sometimes.

[1] OR IS IT

I can't wait for the day where they will modify Origins EULA to prohibit origin users to have any other kind of digital distribution plataform installed in theie computer too.

I haven't bought an EA product in well over 5 years. This certainly won't change things.

ritchards:
Now... imagine a Bethesda game EULA having this clause...

*shudder*

OT: So EA basically get you to do it's job for it - even though you're paying them to do it - and then hit you with heavy sanctions if you carry out this unpaid work to a less than exact standard, even though you've had no formal training?

Sounds like Self-Assessment tax law to me.

It's been almost exactly 2 years since the last time I bought an EA game. They never stop demonstrating that they don't deserve my money.

ritchards:
Now... imagine a Bethesda game EULA having this clause...

That would require Bathesda to bug test their games first ... badum tish (I love their games but by christ do they have some bugs in them).

On Topic....

Bugémon ... gotta catch em all.

Carnagath:
That's nothing, I hear that in the future version of the EULA, EA reserves to right to track you down and murder your family if you don't playtest at least 10 hours a day.

Well, the ironic thing is that it's an increasingly common practice with online games (which is almost everything nowadays) to limit the testing to very specific times. It's been this way for years, but I *DO* remember when things were done a bit differantly since I've done a lot of Alpha and Beta tests.

Being disabled I have a lot of time on my hands, and can in theory play almost any time, but it also means I get tapped to do a lot of things IRL by friends and family since I'm not working or anything. Nowadays you typically get a notification, the same day as the test (or at an awkward time the day before) notifying you when they are turning the servers on, typically a time that cooresponds to the late afternoon or evening which are prime hours when people are going to have responsibilities (but to be fair would also likely be home from school or work). As a result it seems testing tends to be at a relative trickle, and to be fair it DOES seem like those who are dedicated to showing up during those times are those who are so dedicated to the game that they want to do beta to learn exploits. In many cases it seems like the motivation for beta is to get a leg up in learning how to exploit the system for the purposes of making RL money. Remember reports from ToR about people jumping ahead to higher level planets and looting chests to make huge gobs of money and doing it non-stop (combined with Chinese Credit Farmers being there from like day #1).

At any rate I don't blame EA for being increasingly paranoid about this, however I think the best solution is a combination of making alphas and betas more accessible to testers which will probably amount to more of them putting in more hours, and leading to more reports. That and I think they need to be more assertive about who they let into the game, and perhaps have some of their coders and GMs actually observe the player base.

I've also kind of felt that a policy for online games running servers should probably be that Alpha and Beta testers are limited to playing live on specific servers, at least for the first six months to a year of a game's release, whether it's an MMO, or something that merely has online components. The reason being is that it would serve to help prevent not only beta-learned exploits from spreading to the entire game, but also end some of the problems with bullying where more experienced players from Beta basically take over the game and server economies from day #1, and pre-formed guilds start padding up their PVP ratings on defenseless newbs, oftentimes demoralizing and slanting PVP in favor of one faction or another on a server from the beginning. A problem with Betas that seems to have hurt more than a few games is basically turning a bunch of wolves loose on the sheep (including chinese farmers), especially during critical moments of launch when the GMs are focused on other things, by the time the GMs can look at the community in many cases it's already too late to do the damage. Penning up beta testers (and this comes from someone who is one) is probably a good idea. To be honest I'll also say that as "unfair" and "punishing" as this sounds, the companies might be able to soften it a bit by letting people keep beta characters on the beta player servers. This both means that stress testers and such won't get lethargic once the serious "testing" is done and it's all about lag-torture (figuring nothing they do matters anyway) since they will get to keep their effort at least on a specific server, and also keeps the wolves in with the other predators until the rest of the community catches up and can defend themselves/compete.

At any rate, the point here is that beta testing as it works now is a mess and causes a lot of problems (I'm just presenting a hypothetical solution to some of it with the QQing), it's actually good that EA is trying to address one aspect of the issues, though truthfully it's kind of irrelevent until they act on the policy.

TheSniperFan:

Zachary Amaranth:
If Valve were to do this, we'd hear what a great idea it was.

That's right!
And why would we hear that? Because Valve is a great company.
And why is Valve a great company? Because they don't do this kind of s**t.

Your statement is like saying "If they'd have divided by zero...". It just does not work.

Except, you know, they do pull this kind of shit. Their "accept our new ToU that prevents certain lawsuits or you lose all your games forever," or back when people lost their minds over EA's ToU that covered things that Steam already did....

Yeah. The point being...Hold on....

Sylveria:

Maybe, but Valve didn't. EA did.

The point being, people are very very quick to scream bloody murder when EA does it, even if someone else does it. The same people seem to be very quick to apologise for Valve, even if Valve is doing the exact same thing.

There's no perhaps about it. We've seen it in action.

Vault101:

Valok:
image
Oh EA, you never ceases to amuse me.

haha I like that XD

say...anyone remember a bugs life? no one seems too

Okay, I liked the Extended Cut, but that made me laugh. Bravo. XD

OT: Yeah, I can't take this seriously at all. EA can't really communicate well with customers with regards to anything at all, so I have to ask what's the point of this EULA. Even worse: This is coming from its legal department. God only knows how this will show up through their fucked up PR channels.

When is a bug a bug, and when is it just a bizarre or misguided balance issue? "Hmmm... this seems oddly over-powered. They may have intended this, but I better report it as a bug or risk losing access to all my EA games. If I use the best weapon in the game am I exploiting?"

Or is that their goal? They want to be buried in so many spurious "nerf this" bug reports that they have plausible deniability for not fixing actual defects.

EA is continuing its downward spiral yet people still defend it.
Amazing, absolutely amazing.

Its like watching someone defend a Grizzly Bear that is tearing people apart.
"ITS JUST ITS NATURE OTHER BEARS DO THAT TOO!"

EA Beta tests their games before launch?!
Half of them are buggy messes with patches not actually fixing anything you'd assume that the launch was the beta.

I'd like to think EA is above not banning people for failing to report known bugs, but this is the same company who banned someone from Origin (and their games) because someone else cussed at him.

BiH-Kira:
That is a sure "don't have any contact with EA" sign. Just too bad that fanboys are blind.

Let them be blind. It'll sort itself out.

wombat_of_war:

GoldenShadow:
Its just Sim City, who cares if you cheat. It probably has built in cheat codes too.

EA in its infinite wisdom decided to go the route of extensive multiplayer intergration with it hence why they are probably going nuts with the EULA

I'd wager anything that's what they're aiming for.
Due to legal precedence mostly established by Blizzard (and a bit from Autodesk) in several legal battles, if you put the entire game on a mandatory server, you've legally secured your game against everything.

No Contracts of Adhesion. No 1st Sale Doctrine or Used Game market.

It allows for robust measures to discourage returns (by threatening your OTHER purchases with them, natch) without actually breaking any return/refund laws. Loopholes that can slip around some consumer-protection laws (though I do believe several countries outside of the US are cracking down on this).
It even enables planned obsolescence since if the game goes down, oh wells, guess the fans will have to buy the new one at full price again.

Rawne1980:
That would require Bathesda to bug test their games first ... badum tish (I love their games but by christ do they have some bugs in them).

On Topic....

Bugémon ... gotta catch em all.

That's OK, because Bethesda has been perfectly happy to just let their fanbase bug-test AND fix it for them.

And people wonder why I refuse to buy EA games

So EA not only wants to promote SimCity through the beta, but also get the game bug tested without paying anyone and then ban anyone they consider aren't doing a good enough job? I can't even get angry at EA any more, I just shake my head and tut disapprovingly.

Zachary Amaranth:
Except, you know, they do pull this kind of shit. Their "accept our new ToU that prevents certain lawsuits or you lose all your games forever," or back when people lost their minds over EA's ToU that covered things that Steam already did....

If I remember correctly, Valve prevents class action lawsuits because they're expensive and often lead to nothing. They said that if you have a problem, it's between you and them. They even, no matter what the final decision is, pay for your lawsuit entirely up to 10k$.
That being said, it is a dick-move. Not to the same degree, but still bad.

Zachary Amaranth:
Yeah. The point being...Hold on....

The point being, people are very very quick to scream bloody murder when EA does it, even if someone else does it. The same people seem to be very quick to apologise for Valve, even if Valve is doing the exact same thing.

There's no perhaps about it. We've seen it in action.

The point is that they're not doing "exact[ly] the same thing". In every case Valve does something bad, EA does it worse.

EA: Origin collects data. This is mandatory and part of the service. You HAVE to live with it.
Valve: Steam collects data. This is optional and turned off by default. You are even warned before you turn it on.

EA: Yearly releases of pretty much every franchise.
Valve: We don't do HL3, because we currently lack good ideas for it. We don't want to ruin it.

You know when I heard this the last time? Me neither, because you usually hear how studios get closed and franchises get dropped because they don't generate enough income or how they make them generate enough income by other means (see Dead Space for example).

Besides that Valve makes high-quality games, the Steam sales are the s**t and they're pushing Linux, which are the reasons I love them.

You can hate Valve as much as you like and it's your right to do so. However, you can't deny that if you'd take all the news from Valve and EA, the positive/negative ratio would be much brighter on Valve's side.

Tar Palantir:
Is is even legal to ban you from all your PAID games for that??? If I were testing SimCity (for free, remember), I'd just disinstall and find something better to do with my time. In fact every one of them should quit until the EULA is modified.....now try to beta test your product on your own, idiots.

Yup, because the EULA states that they're licensing the game to you, not selling it. Clever, no?

& people will continue to buy there games until EA makes them literally unplayable. Not me though; Officially DONE with EA

EA mis-words something. Entire forum must comment with similar replies about how evil/stupid.corrupt/etc EA is. I would set my clock by it, but with how antsy the forum is to bash EA my clock would run faster each day.

EA wants to ensure its Beta tester actually report all bugs and not report some bugs but leave some unreported because the tester thinks its cool/funny/going to screw EA. As such they insert a clause that they will retaliate if you intentional don't report bugs. I imagine its mostly so they can get you if you do actually screw something up, much like a law against loitering that rarely get enforced but is useful if someone becomes a problem. The retaliation is a bit much, why not just ban them from the beta and then flag there account for extra monitoring on other games? That was EA's misstep. Though honestly they probably don't want some dick who's trying to screw their beta over playing their games anyways and maybe that was who the clause was meant for.

Honestly with how many people hate EA and are trying to screw them over I'm surprised they aren't more hostile. I can easily see some of my fellow gamers joining the beta just to try and make a mess and stick it to EA for... I dunno insert any recent news story about them.

I want to know how they actually plan to prove someone encountered a particular bug (especially with things like the thousands of hardware configurations that exist in the PC world) and failed to report it on purpose.

Good luck EA, you will need it.

As if this will stop people from buying EA's games.

Tar Palantir:
Is is even legal to ban you from all your PAID games for that??? If I were testing SimCity (for free, remember), I'd just disinstall and find something better to do with my time. In fact every one of them should quit until the EULA is modified.....now try to beta test your product on your own, idiots.

Not really, ToS and EULAs don't override existing law and you can't just write whatever you want in them and somehow make them legally binding. The thing is though, who would actually battle EA's (or Valve's, for that matter) army of lawyers over maybe 300 bucks worth of video games? To my knowledge there's no precedent, no one ever sued over matters such as these, it just isn't worth the money and time. So they just get away with it.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here