• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

class action investor lawsuit against EA for BF4 quality LOL

We're talking about the overall quality of a game, not bugs. Personally, the only bug I encounter in Skyrim (this is on PC mind you) was the jumping mammoth glitch, which was more hilarious than game breaking. The bugs other people encounter are unfortunate, but that game is so big and ambitious that I think Bethesda should be forgiven for the most part.

Would you rather have games like the Elder Scrolls and Fallout with a bunch or bugs or not have them at all?
 
I'd rather they be delayed three months to triage bugs and polish the experience than push it out the door before it is truly ready.
 
I just read that NBA Live was a buggy mess as well. Then there's Sim City... EA can't seem to release a stable game. Heads need to roll over there.

John_Abraham said:
We're talking about the overall quality of a game, not bugs. Personally, the only bug I encounter in Skyrim (this is on PC mind you) was the jumping mammoth glitch, which was more hilarious than game breaking. The bugs other people encounter are unfortunate, but that game is so big and ambitious that I think Bethesda should be forgiven for the most part.

Would you rather have games like the Elder Scrolls and Fallout with a bunch or bugs or not have them at all?
Click to expand...

Who says we're talking about "overall quality" gamebreaking bugs are gamebreaking bugs. A company that charges a premium price for their product should not have these kinds of things. It's mismanagement.

I'd rather not have them at all. Stop rushing releases. Release the games when they are stable and done. I don't need anything RIGHT NOW cuz I want to play. The premise is ridiculous.
 
Earlier, one person claimed that Mass Effect, Borderlands, and Skyrim were flat out bad games. That is entirely false. Not a matter of opinion.
 
John_Abraham said:
Earlier, one person claimed that Mass Effect, Borderlands, and Skyrim were flat out bad games. That is entirely false. Not a matter of opinion.
Click to expand...

As extreme as it sounds, it IS a matter of opinion. Nothing to take much stake in though as they were/are all popular games. My personal opinion is that Borderlands wasn't a good game. I just couldn't keep interested in it soo.. for me, not a good game.

People are different. Accept it. I don't believe in people speaking for everyone else. :)
 
Agreed. The only title of the three that is relevant here is Mass Effect because it was made by Bioware and published by EA. EA bought out Bioware when Mass Effect was in its final months of production. Skyrim is Bethesda Softworks/Zenimax and Borderlands is Gearbox Software/2K Games.

Good games or not is also irrelevant because we're talking about bugs here, not game design.

I think all this "mismanagement" (good word for it erocker) can squarely be placed on EA's sliding value as a publically traded corporation. It's all about the money and the only way EA gets paid is if they publish. The management feels they have to push titles out before they're properly triaged because they need to throw investors a bone. The investors are fighting back because EA has made too many bad decisions and especially some that are highly questionable (the "officer" selling stocks).

John Riccitello was CEO from 2007-March 30, 2013. Larry Probst has been CEO since.
 
Last edited:
I think you guys are very closed minded. There's opinion and then there's fact. There are plenty of games I can't get in to or don't even like, but I still recognize that they are good games. World of Warcraft, for instance, is a game I hate playing and will never get in to but I still recognize it as one of the best games in it's class. Final Fantasy is another one.

My "opinion" is that a game is factually good or bad. Opinion dictates whether you enjoy the game or not.
 
John_Abraham said:
I think you guys are very closed minded. There's opinion and then there's fact. There are plenty of games I can't get in to or don't even like, but I still recognize that they are good games. World of Warcraft, for instance, is a game I hate playing and will never get in to but I still recognize it as one of the best games in it's class. Final Fantasy is another one.

My "opinion" is that a game is factually good or bad. Opinion dictates whether you enjoy the game or not.
Click to expand...

So you are basing your opinions due to the majority of other opinions and are calling me closed minded. Okay, you're welcome to your opinion. :)
 
I just stated that there are plenty of games that I personally do not enjoy but I can see why so many others enjoy and why they are good games. What is so hard to understand about that? Is it ridiculous to think "oh I don't enjoy Borderlands, but it is a well made game"?
 
It isn't a "well made game." To this day, one still can't view the sniper proficiency stat without selecting another stat and arrow keying down to it. You also can't view extra modifiers on weapons unless you make the font smaller. Even though the game came out years ago and it had eight patches, it still has obvious bugs. And that's ignoring all the design issues: jobs send you to the same place twice on virtually all maps, no fast travel inside the DLCs, Moxxi's Underdome (too many issues to list here), and an overpowered optional hyper-boss in the third DLC (to name a few).
 
John_Abraham said:
I just stated that there are plenty of games that I personally do not enjoy but I can see why so many others enjoy and why they are good games. What is so hard to understand about that? Is it ridiculous to think "oh I don't enjoy Borderlands, but it is a well made game"?
Click to expand...

Let's take it down a notch here, and try to understand where everyone is coming from.

John_Abraham stated that these three games were good as a fact.
Hellrazor stated that none of them were.
Frick brought up criticism on how the games did not suit his personal tastes.
Lilhasselhoffer said that separating objectively good and subjectively good was not being done properly.
FordGT90Concept brought up that of the games you cited, two were heavily patched.

That's a long way to go on a thread about EA. I have to accept some blame for driving it here but John_Abraham, you haven't been listening. We understand that you like some of these games, but that needs to be decoupled from whether they are objectively good or not. FordGT90Concept correctly cited that Mass Effect 1 basically went unpatched, with the exception of updating relevant to DLC. Bioware, whether you like their games or not, generally releases a complete and objectively good game. Frick and Hellrazor subjectively do not like the game.

You continuing to bang on about these games being good is frustratingly foolish. I like Skyrim personally, but I've got a backlog of bugs that is as long as my arm. Flying Mammoths, teleporting people, reverse flying dragons, falling through the world, etc... Despite all this, I believe the game is entertaining. It was not good until enough patching had been applied to functionally make Skyrim 1.0 a completely different game. Likewise, Mass Effect was an entertaining game. The difference is that Mass Effect 1.0 worked, and the only real difference between it and 1.02 was DLC content.


I'm standing with FordGT90Concept here, EA is the one hurting EA here. They rush games to meet artificial hype, then release something buggy. The difference between Zenimax and EA is that people tolerate Zenimax's failures because they are going to get patched quickly and they target a different audience. EA wants to target people who desire instant gratification, but they don't want to spend the time polishing away the flaws. It all comes down to money, and EA will hopefully learn their lesson (wow, I get the feeling of deja vu there..... odd.....).
 
I'll be honest, TL;DR.

Honestly, I really don't give a shit about this conversation anymore.

Just play your games and enjoy them. I'm out!
 
There were certainly issues with the game, but the patches have made it more stable. It should hopefully get better in the next few months. But the initial release was very rough with lots of disconnects.
 
I see this lawsuit as bogus as most AAA games come out and then need patches to some level. I have played the beta for BF 2142, Crysis 2, BF 3, Crysis 3 and BF 4. I have then played those games on release dates and have found issues. For the most part they are "playable". I have told myself to just wait for a couple months for everything in the game to be "ironed-out" before buying/playing. But because I am "addicted" to these two series I do not wait. This is on me as I know what to expect. From what I remember, I have actually had less problem with the released BF 4 than I have with the other games I mentioned.
In a perfect world we would not see such issues. However when you have a mass market willing to spend their money on the next release (as most of us here seem to do) then can you blame them for releasing them while still needing work?
 
First week or so of BF4 had constant disconnects and did not save your stats; certainly game breaking.
 
I personally did not encounter those problems.
 
John_Abraham said:
They have some of the highest average critic and users scores on Metacritic, which says a lot. I can understand you personally disliking aspects of the games, but to dislike or even hate them is just naive.
Click to expand...
Thus the troll exposes itself as the troll it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top