Classy Action: Lawsuit Alleges EA Misled Over BF4 Bugs

By Graham Smith on December 19th, 2013 at 7:00 pm.

OBJECTION!

It seems you’re not the only ones who don’t love EA. Law firm Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP are pursuing action against the company for claims that Electronic Arts withheld information about the state of Battlefield 4 in order to artificially increase their share price. Now that the game is out, buggy and struggling commercially, Electronic Arts’ share price has dipped. That makes investors not so happy also lawyers quite happy.

As reported by Games Informer, the complaint, “alleges that during the Class Period, defendants issued materially false and misleading statements highlighting the purported strength of the Company’s rollout of version 4 of its all-important Battlefield video game series, which had provided approximately 11% of its revenues in fiscal 2012.”

They get more specific in their complaints, including that “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.” Which makes it sound as if they’re listing the mere presence of downloadable content as a problem in itself.

Currently the law firm are looking for a lead plaintiff, to represent the group who purchased stock between July 24, 2013 and December 4, 2013.

An EA representative has told Game Informer that the company “believe these claims are meritless” and that they “intend to aggressively defend ourselves, and we’re confident the court will dismiss the complaint in due course.”

I have no idea whether the claims have merit or not, but players of Battlefield 4 are certainly having a tough time since the game’s launch. As did John, when he tried to play it. DICE have reportedly dropped everything to focus on just fixing its many glitches and server issues. That’s all a separate issue from whether EA misled shareholders however, as gratifying as it might be for disgruntled players to see lawyers take EA to task for Battlefield 4 being “riddled with bugs.”

This might be the start of a larger spell of trouble for EA, as another class action lawsuit firm Holzer Holzer & Fistel was reported last week to be investigating a similar suit against the company. Although the whole thing looks a little like sharks have tasted a little blood in the water, and are circling in the interest of more meat, rather than any sense of correcting injustice.

Lawyers are either snipers or sharks, is what I’m saying. Sniper sharks.

, , , .

85 Comments »

  1. SominiTheCommenter says:

    DICE reportedly dropped everything, including the ball.

    • Premium User Badge

      colossalstrikepackage says:

      And so did Maxis. Big time. Fancy the chances, unless they had some EA morons dictating terms.

      I say give EA a real legal and financial kicking. I’m pretty sure that they will be fine with their mountains of cash, but given how deeply these guys care about the bottom line, this, more than releasing buggy games, will tell them they are doing something very wrong.

      They are clearly skimping money on quality controls and testing. That is frankly inexcusable given their resources. They screwed up and should face the music.

      EA aren’t the only ones, but they are making a habit of it and doing it in spectacular ways. Given their size, they should be easy target practice for sniper sharks that hate DLC.

      • Premium User Badge

        bills6693 says:

        Except it’ll probably be cheaper for them to make sure they follow the letter of the law and not say anything misleading, and just say nothing at all, than to actually do QC and testing.

        The lawsuit isn’t that EA released a buggy game. Its that they said they were releasing a good game and then it was buggy. So to rectify they can either release a good game or they can not say the game isn’t buggy – guess which one is cheaper :P

        • eQuality_Ninja says:

          Ah – but not saying anything misleading will mean their marketing department will get upset and they will be able to (probably) flog less games – which will (probably) upset earnings forecasts and thus shareholders.

          It should cut EA both ways. The optimum move is to releasing quality games and thus sell even more products (I wonder what percentage of potential customers waited for reviews and then stayed the hell away from it) – but yes, there is always the easy option of producing mediocre crap that is not as well marketed (lied about).

          Man, all this talk really leaves me wanting some kind of industry watchdog for broken games. There really should be a penalty for companies that sell crap to their customers while lying through their teeth.

    • Baines says:

      Battlefield 4 honestly doesn’t sound more broken than Modern Warfare 3 was. The main difference is that DICE said “Our game has issues. We are going to focus on fixing those issues.” while Infinity Ward said “Our game is fine. That isn’t an issue/That issue is the fault of [insert blame game target here]. Oh, and we can’t get a patch out by the end of the month because we need to finish this month’s DLC release.”

      Maybe the DLC itself is the most important difference. Infinity Ward chose (and admitted to making that choice) DLC over fixing their game (not that they ever appeared capable of fixing the game anyway, and never did fix many issues). DICE chose stopping other work, presumably including DLC, to work on fixing the game. DLC being delayed means money not coming in as fast, and as far as business is concerned that means money lost, so stockholders get upset. Or lawyers got upset, and figured they could talk some stockholders into a class action lawsuit so that they can buy new summer homes if they win.

      • Zelos says:

        While you’re correct in your assessment that the main problem lies in their commitment to fix the bugs, thus delaying expansions, BF4 is significantly worse than MW3 or BLOPS was. They’re not even really comparable.

        • Baines says:

          Battlefield 4 has obviously “unacceptable” bugs and issues. Spawning outside the legal play area of a map, for example, is unacceptable. The game crashing is unacceptable.

          Modern Warfare 3 lacked obviously unacceptable bugs, but was instead plagued by issues that were “undesirable.” Being spawned on top of an enemy player is undesirable, but it is something that you allow might happen.

          But volume is also a factor. Undesirable issues can occur with unacceptable frequency, and that describes MW3. MW3 netcode was borked (and IW spent half a year denying any chance that their code could be at fault rather than look for issues on their side) and I don’t believe was ever fixed. MW3′s approach to spawning was broken at fundamental design levels, leading to every match showcasing unacceptable amounts of undesirable spawns. (IW, unable to see the issues or just unwilling to do the amount of work required for a complete overhaul, only ever made minor tweaks, which only changed the kind of broken behavior players saw.) Hit detection was broken in various ways, and the riot shield was completely unreliable. (The riot shield was also an unpopular weapon, which caused IW to ignore its issues.)

          • Monkeh says:

            Spawning outside the map is unacceptable, yet spawning on top of an enemy is acceptable? You really must explain me your logic sometime, because I don’t see it.

    • RosaJHunter says:

      my roomate’s half-sister makes $86 every hour on the laptop. She has been laid off for five months but last month her income was $16579 just working on the laptop for a few hours. straight from the source… http://cpl.pw/OKeIJo

  2. Premium User Badge

    Aerothorn says:

    Missing a comma after the “sniper shark week” tag :)

    • tasteful says:

      RPS pushed this post out the door with a serious flaw

      • Premium User Badge

        darkChozo says:

        As a subscriber, I’m considering suing for my two dollars back.

        • Boothie says:

          I will certainly not read any more rps articles until RPS apologizes for releasing articles in this broken state

  3. Premium User Badge

    darkChozo says:

    That image is missing a monocoled fat man carrying moneybags and laughing. And maybe a weeping bald eagle.

  4. FurryLippedSquid says:

    I hope the lawyers win.

    Bethesda and Dice both need a stern talking to.

    • CobraLad says:

      I hope gamers lose. People working their asses off so some random kid or hipster can say they are dicks and evil.

      • FurryLippedSquid says:

        I wouldn’t resort to childish insults, but I’d like to see more regulation of game development. Not too much to ask is it? You wouldn’t put up with the shit we get from any other product, why is it OK for games?

        • Emeraude says:

          Because think of the poor developers/publishers ! They are people too ! They deserve to make a living, even when delivering a product that is considered below acceptable quality standards.

          (Frankly, the fact that Bethesda got away scot-free with the whole Skyrim PS3 save-system debacle is mind boggling to me.)

          • SominiTheCommenter says:

            Corporations are people, my friend.
            Wanting them to pay their fair share is just shaving Communist down our throats.

          • BobbyDylan says:

            Ok, I’ll ask. How many Communists have you shaved?

          • Emeraude says:

            Does decapitation count as shaving ?

        • tormeh says:

          1. Because it’s entertainment, not critical infrastructure. (why do we put up with internet interruptions? No idea)
          2. Because it’s software and software is by definition buggy.

          If someone sells you a movie and it’s just terrible in every way, including not working in your DVD player on the first try, would this be a reason to get your money back? Not where I live.

          • Emeraude says:

            But if the DVD is, say, missing an audio track that was advertised on the box because of a bad pressing, then yes, you are entitled to a refund.

            why do we put up with internet interruptions?

            I don’t know why you do, I don’t. Last (and, to be fair, only) time my Internet provider suffered significant service interruptions, I filled a formal complaint, and had the interruption abated from my monthly fees.

            Because it’s entertainment, not critical infrastructure.

            Went to see a movie to the theater, and the roof was leaking on your head, and your seat had rusty nails all other, but not reason to complain and demand a refund, it’s just entertainment.

          • Comrade Roe says:

            I’ve certainly never heard of this definition where software is automatically buggy. Obviously, no software any of us know of us totally bug free, but when we pay for a finished product, it’s supposed to be finished. Bugs happen, but such notable ones as people are experiencing shouldn’t happen, especially if they took anything from the beta. Unless the term beta was just an excuse for a buggy pre-release demo.

            And, actually, yes, that would be a legitamite reason for a refund, not counting if your DVD player in this theoretical situation is theoretically a box of pretty lights.

          • Enso says:

            Exactly. Not sure where you live but in the UK it’s part of law. The ‘Sale of Goods Act 1979′ entitles a customer to a refund.

            “(2A)For the purposes of this Act, goods are of satisfactory quality if they meet the standard that a reasonable person would regard as satisfactory, taking account of any description of the goods, the price (if relevant) and all the other relevant circumstances.

            (2B)For the purposes of this Act, the quality of goods includes their state and condition and the following (among others) are in appropriate cases aspects of the quality of goods—

            (a)fitness for all the purposes for which goods of the kind in question are commonly supplied,

            (b)appearance and finish,

            (c)freedom from minor defects,

            (d)safety, and

            (e)durability. ”
            - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1979/54

            It’s not just entertainment, it’s an entertainment product and so if the game doesn’t meet the standards at which most operate you should be able to get a refund. Unfortunately they might try and say that it’s technically a license and then regarded as a service (I ain’t no lawyer though).

            Companies’ modus operandi is to find loopholes and reduce customer rights to maximise profit, so fuck ‘em. Best case scenario it sets a legal precedent which can be used against companies in the future.

  5. lautalocos says:

    even though it´s unfair, the thought of EA losing money puts a smile on my face. a really sadisitic smile.

  6. Erinduck says:

    Honestly, I wouldn’t be super surprised if they ended up having to pay out. BF4 is a total disaster piece and there’s a lot of evidence backing that claim up.

    • Smoky_the_Bear says:

      Honestly most of the claims about the state of BF4 have been greatly over exaggerated in the gaming media. It has some crashing issues but nothing that has stopped most people playing the game, and the game is still good, calling it completely broken etc is going over the top and buying into the negativity hype-train.

      I do not like the precedent of suing video game companies if they underperform.
      This company bought shares hoping to make money from the release of BF4, it did not do as well as predicted, now they are trying to screw their money out of the legal system anyway. Companies throwing around expensive lawyers to bully others to a point where they can’t compete is, in my eyes, a disgusting practice and could be damaging to the video games industry in the long run if this sort of thing becomes commonplace.

      But hey, its America right, something went wrong, gotta sue someone, or something, or everything.

      • Reapy says:

        Should call the release an ‘alpha’ and be immune from lawsuits.

      • Erinduck says:

        They’re not exaggerated at all. Many graphics card configurations (especially SLI) fail to render properly at all, there’s still loads of crashing issues on all platforms, the PS4 version was barely beta levels of stability, they had to halt all other development just to start putting out patches to get the game to work, and there was a massive unloading of stock right before the game was released by top execs.

        This isn’t some fly-by-night operation. The people heading this up are the same people who were going up against Enron when they were pulling their financial bullshit and misrepresentation.

      • radar83 says:

        If you had any idea of what investing in a company involves you would know that EA needed to have a prospectus with a financial estimate based on future sales as well as on going game developments. When a company doesn’t hit those targets investors have a right to know why. In this case it was obvious that the company mislead investors on future financial position from the BF4 development. There could be a very big case here to answer for.

  7. BooleanBob says:

    So their legal opinion is that DLC is a ‘problem’? Whodathunkit, a lawyer I can agree with!

  8. db1331 says:

    I must be in the minority. I’ve been playing since launch. I had a couple crashes the first few days, but that’s it. Game runs smooth on ultra. The net code is still the same as it was in BF3. Every once in a while a clear hit will not register. It’s frustrating, but a small thing to put up with for what is easily the best MP shooter out there right now.

    I’m wondering what % of these complaints are from people who play on store bought machines, who don’t know how to update drivers, or manually update Punk Buster, etc.

    • mukuste says:

      On “store bought machines”? So only people who have enough time to build their own PC are expected to have a smooth experience? That seems like a rather weird assumption.

      • db1331 says:

        By “People on store bought machines”, I mean people who are likely less capable of solving a crash bug than a more advanced user. I’ve got both kinds in my group of BF4 buddies. The guys who bought a PC and aren’t as tech savvy will just shout, “WHY ISN’T THIS WORKING!?” when the game won’t load or crashes. Then we have to go through the check list with them. Did you update your drivers? Did you update PB? Is your graphics card OC’d? Eventually we will get them up and running. One guy was cursing BF4 as being shit for weeks, because he crashed almost every round. Turns out his CPU temp was through the roof. He bought a new cooler, and what do you know, problem solved. Back in BF3, one of our guys was wondering how the game was running like such complete shit on his new PC he just purchased. After doing some investigating, we realized he had plugged his monitor into his onboard video port, and not his video card. We told him to move his LCD cable to the other plug, and he replied, “Yeah, that’s a lot better.”

        My original point was, I bet most of these bugs at the launch of BF4 could have been solved with even the most minor bit of troubleshooting by the user. I’m not saying they should have to do so, but if you are going to play on PC, you should know these things. It’s like calling yourself a car enthusiast and not being able to change your own oil.

        • Smoky_the_Bear says:

          Trust me when I say this was not the only reason for crashing. Everyone I play with experienced crashing to some degree. I’ve been building PC’s for years, I know what I’m doing, the game was still not entirely stable, playable, but not stable.
          Also Nvidia and its drivers seem to be somewhat of a culprit, I thing AMD cards faire better due to DICE optimizing their development on AMD. I think people with AMD cards probably have less problems, thats not something the user can fix outside of buying another card.
          Stuff like plugging the GFX card into the wrong place is a non issue. This would affect any game not just Battlefield.

          • db1331 says:

            I had crashes as well. But now most nights I play I don’t experience any. In the first few days I would crash every other round or so. And I do have an AMD card, so that could have something to do with it.

        • Parge says:

          Well that is an actual lie.

          If you plug your monitor cable into your onboard GPU with a discrete card plugged in, then you just get no image.

          I wonder how much of the rest of your post is a lie?

          • Shockpaddles says:

            actually what you put is a complete lie, how do you think people without a dual headed GFX card get dual monitors setup! having an onboard gfx card enabled while using an expansion gfx card is totally pleausable as i have done it many times.

          • db1331 says:

            I’m typing this right now on my work computer with two displays, one hooked up to a graphics card, and the other to the onboard video, so I’m getting a real kick out of this reply.

    • DrGonzo says:

      Well, I’m very suprised at that. Me and my group of BF friends have all had issues with this. One of them has a relatively new pc he bought already built. Two of us built our machines I believe. The systems all all quite varied, yet we all have the same or very similar issues. And it happens all the time. I crash every night without fail, it’s definetely improved with patches, the latest patch means I can finally play Siege of Shanghai.

      However, DayZ is out, and I’ve actually had far less problems getting that to work, so I think I’m probably done with BF, maybe for good to be honest as it was such a negative experience.

      I think this lawsuit is taking it a bit far though. They released a shit game, it hasn’t sold very well, so it seemed to sort itself out really.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      A large amount of bug complaints are legitimate. The “sound stutter CTD” bug, for example? That’s been present in every Frostbite-developed game since Bad Company 2, yet DICE just finally got around to fixing it in BF4. The server crashes are also a problem that has been affecting thousands of players. I could easily list two dozen more examples of widely-experienced technical issues in BF4 if you wanted me to.

      I’d be willing to bet the majority of the complaints about BF4 are on EA’s head, not the users’.

      • SuicideKing says:

        BF3 or BF4? I mean, wasn’t BF3 the next BF after BC2?

        Abbreviation overdose ftw?

        • SkittleDiddler says:

          Definitely abbreviation overdose. Thanks for pointing that out.

          Fixed mah post.

    • Meusli says:

      I have been PC gaming for 28 years and never bought a shop PC and yet I still have to play BF3 as BF4 runs like a bag of poo.

      I find your opinion quite insulting to be honest. The Battlelog forums are full of helpful chaps like yourself who feel as long as they are not having problems then there is no problem. Yet you just have to look at the game servers to see how empty some of them are, to realise that the audience for this game is wandering off.

    • gamma says:

      ^^ you guys are misreading this…

      “(…) Electronic Arts’ share price has dipped

      “Currently the law firm are looking for a lead plaintiff, to represent the group who purchased stock between July 24, 2013 and December 4, 2013.”

      Those complaining and pushing for action are not gamers feeling defrauded, but investors, or even more accurately, lawyers which must have found some flaw in EA’s defence, and are now looking for investors to come forward. (and whoever does, only via hipocrisy, will ignore the fact that generly investors are those which push for unfinished releases in the first place)

      This has nothing to do with the technical state of the game from the player’s pov. This is just sharks vs sharks type of thing.

      You gotta LOVE it!

      • Smoky_the_Bear says:

        Class action lawyers are scum tbh. They are the bit of dirt that gathers under my shoe. I wouldn’t have a problem with they all dying tomorrow.

      • apa says:

        So one can sue if the stock goes to other way than expected? I can’t understand, yet another reason why I’m not warrenbuffett…

        • Premium User Badge

          darkChozo says:

          You can sue if a publicly traded company tries to mislead investors, like if they lie about their financials or about how well one of their products are doing. This is a bit more questionable, though.

          • GreatHackster says:

            From what I understand from a cursory google search, that’s essentially what they did — answer direct questions about the product’s quality and readiness for market with lies that are apparent given the state of the released game. This invited a detrimental reliance on their falsehood, which is one of the criteria for fraud in the stocktradin’ bidness (or most bidnesses).

    • Premium User Badge

      darkChozo says:

      I’d agree that the narrative around BF4 has been a bit exaggerated. There are a lot of people who are calling it broken in its current state; while I don’t doubt there are people who can’t play for various reasons, I don’t think that’s the case for a majority of people.

      That being said, while I’m mostly happy with the game’s technical state at this point, I still crash more frequently than I’d like. It’s more once or two every couple playsessions now than the once per round it was at launch, but it’s still pretty bad for a released $60 game.

    • xavdeman says:

      “I’m wondering what % of these complaints are from people (…) who don’t know how to update drivers, or manually update Punk Buster, etc.”
      None of those things should be necessary. Manually updating the anti cheat software, which is PART OF THE GAME, least of all. If the game updates itself, the borked anti-cheat software should, too. Don’t blame the player.

      About the drivers: you can’t blame the players – DICE only made a binding recommendation of which driver to use with the December 16 patch, which “-Made NVidia 331.82 or later driver versions mandatory for all players.”, which is the latest stable driver. Steam included this functionality a LONG time ago. Again: don’t blame the player.

      The netcode really is shitty. It’s basically clientside hit detection with a with a serverside check. But that serverside check is too lax in disregarding obviously impossible kills (e.g. when you’re safely behind cover), and too strict about the shooting of people who have high ping. Example: http://i.imgur.com/9DtyXjm.gif

      • db1331 says:

        I’m not saying people should have to update PB or install beta drivers. But that’s the reality of it. You shouldn’t have to lock up your bike, but you do.

        I don’t know what to say though. I play for 2-3 hours 3-4 nights a week. Last night I played 7 straight rounds of CQ, and never had a crash. I saw one guy on the enemy team lagging around one time, and had one or two of the infamous 1% trade kills. I’m not saying everyone’s experience is like mine. I’m just baffled how someone can have near-identical hardware as my rig, and say the game is completely unplayable for them. If we’re playing the same game, on the same PC, where must the problem lie?

    • Smoky_the_Bear says:

      None of these things you mention should be required in order to run a AAA, £45/$60 game though.
      Why should people need to know to manually update 3rd party software in order to get a game to work properly?

      • db1331 says:

        You’re asking why, if people are getting kicked by Punk Buster, they should know, “Hey, maybe I should try reinstalling/updating Punk Buster?” I don’t know how to answer that. Because common sense is a good thing to have?

        • Smoky_the_Bear says:

          God you are full of yourself. No I don’t have issues with punkbuster nor know anyone that does have, its not one of the reported problems and hasn’t ever been. Yet you were insinuating that the problems people were having with BF4 is mostly down to their lack of knowledge. Its just not the case. DICE are admitting there are issues. They are fixing said issues with patches and hence the game is more stable, everybody I play games with who have good rigs and zero problems running pretty much any other game has said the same thing, the game is way more stable now.
          Yet you seem adamant that it must be the general user base that is at fault because……..I don’t know, because you want to make yourself feel more intelligent than others for some reason? You seem to have had a good experience with the game, some people are, it doesn’t mean that EVERYONE else must inherently be doing something wrong. Quit being so short sighted.

          • db1331 says:

            Two of my friends were getting hangups or crashes loading a map. They manually updated PB, and it fixed it. If you are incapable of doing something like that to fix your problem on your own, go play on the consoles and wait for the devs to fix it for you. That’s what they’re there for.

  9. Premium User Badge

    molamolacolacake says:

    I’m going to lobby work to change my title on business cards to “Sniper Shark.” Much more awesome.

  10. mukuste says:

    I actually hate litigious lawyers more than EA. So there.

    • Lev Astov says:

      Yeah, I’m very conflicted about this one. Should I side with a bunch of whiney greedy invstors and lawyers, the like of which instigated the destruction of many a franchise? Or should I side with the company that willingly played to the tune of those people and actively destroyed those franchises?

      • Lanfranc says:

        Not that I don’t love a good lawsuit, but I’m inclined to say if you bought stocks in EA, you deserve what you get.

        • Skabooga says:

          I too am dubious that EA was sufficiently fraudulent to warrant a lawsuit, but then again, I have no idea what exactly they were telling prospective shareholders. Still, this lawsuit business seems entirely backwards to how civil cases should go, what with charges being made before an actual complaint.

          Aww, man, am I defending EA even though they were obviously being a little scummy? There is just no way to feel good about this one.

          • dogoncrook says:

            I’d wager this isn’t over some rosy statements made to shareholders. I’m sure these lawyers know exactly what they are going to receive during discovery, but it wouldn’t be very smart at this stage to say what that is, and often in lawsuits like this they already have it whatever it is they want the company to produce. That’s just my guess though, and it’s mostly gut, because at this point there just isn’t enough information.

  11. BLACKOUT-MK2 says:

    Lawyers and EA- They is like peas and carr-ots.

  12. sharks.don't.sleep says:

    Gamespot writes that several EA executives sold thousands of shares ahead of Battlefield 4′s release:

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/class-action-lawsuit-commenced-over-buggy-battlefield-4-ea-calls-it-meritless-update/1100-6416790/

    • JohnnyPanzer says:

      Oh man, that graph of stock sales is a work of art. I honestly think they’re (EA) going to lose this one, it’s starting to look like a clear-cut case of stock manipulation.

      Had it been a simple case of false advertising towards consumers they would never burn for it, but stock manipulation is taken a lot more seriously by the courts. And when every single exec in the company sells massive ammounts of shares moments before the game goes live, after they’ve first talked about how fricking solid and polished the game is, it’s going to be extremely hard to mount a defence against this lawsuit.

  13. Lev Astov says:

    I would very much like a game about sniper sharks now. Someone make that happen, please.

  14. Premium User Badge

    mpk says:

    If this results in a win for the plaintiffs which then leads to more developers/publishers releasing games that are actually COMPLETE then this is A Good Thing.

    I imagine that an out of court settlement and no long term resolution to bugged releases and Day 1 patches will be the actual result but still. A man can dream.

    • Lanfranc says:

      Nah. Probaby all it will lead to are companies being less ebullient and more disclaimer-y in their statements about upcoming games.

    • Horg says:

      It wont make any difference to how games development is conducted. This is purely an argument around how EA dealt with the BF4 launch effect on their share prices, and weather or not they abused the buggy release to earn money from stock. Legally, no one cares about DICE releasing buggy code.

  15. chris1479 says:

    This gives me a deep warm fuzzy feeling inside, after I asked for my money back and they said no. Hmmm <3 Lawyers.

    • Premium User Badge

      colossalstrikepackage says:

      I had the opposite experience – I tried to give them my money, but Origin (very firmly) told me to shove it where the sun don’t shine. In retrospect, I think it was looking after my best interests.

      Thanks, buggy interface for keeping me away from the bugs!

  16. bangalores says:

    Maybe now companies will stop trying to emulate the COD release model…..doubt it though.

    Seriously though, can anyone actually point out to me one truly GOOD game which was developed on an annual or biannual release schedule?

  17. MajDis4ster says:

    As a sniper shark, I thank you for not, as have some of your competitors, reporting that this was a suit over bugs or performance issues. As you know, and as some of the commenters have failed to notice, they’ve been sued for allegedly misleading investors/shareholders – big difference. I haven’t read the documents and wouldn’t know whether the case has merit. But, it’s important to recognize this isn’t a suit brought by or on behalf of upset consumers. Thanks, and keep up the great work.

    • eQuality_Ninja says:

      By which you mean, it’s a suit that the suits actually care about? Pun full intended.

  18. Premium User Badge

    Ham Solo says:

    Even if I don’t know what to make of the law suit or if it has any chances, I hope they treat it as a fucking wake up call and get their shit together to stop release games prematurely.

    • cylentstorm says:

      Amen. Not that I’m a fan of lawyers–generally speaking–but I suppose that EA needs to be slapped around for a bit.

  19. Mirqy says:

    “version 4 of its all-important Battlefield video game series”
    “version 4 of its all-important Battlefield video game series”

    “version 4 of its all-important Battlefield video game series”

    I’m sorry, but I am completely hypnotised by this phrase. It is beautiful.

  20. Gotcha says:

    That’s ok i bought this game an it won’t even install.but your other games work/install wtf
    i have well enough space to run it/install.
    BF4 you suck

  21. EvilLaufter says:

    Looks like EA is going out of it’s way to snag that Worst Company Award three years in a row. It seems like a foregone conclusion if this actually does go down. The shit train will be legendary.

    Honestly, I’m hoping this does go down something big. I want EA and DICE’s ass on the mark when they make my god damn SW: Battlefront!