Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

March 11, 2011 -

One BioWare fan who might have said the wrong thing on an official forum found himself in an awkward situation. After saying what some might deem a derogatory statement in an official BioWare forum, user v_ware found that he couldn't play Dragon Age II. What is odd about this is that Dragon Age II is not a multiplayer game. One of the reasons this may have happened is because forum accounts are connected to game registrations, and v_ware tried to register the game after he was suspended.

Still, it seems like a very odd situation to everyone; why would BioWare stop someone from playing a game they just bought even if that individual received a temporary ban on one of their forums? It's plain silliness. The ban made it so that v_ware couldn't play Dragon Age II for 72 hours. So what did he say that was so horrible?

"Have you sold your souls to the EA devil?"

Putting aside the statement, a game company should never stop someone from playing a single player game or to conduct a transaction that benefits them. It is bad customer service and bad business.

At the very least, this situation should put smart mouthed forum users on notice: if you are going to get sassy, make sure you register your new games first.

Source: Kotaku by way of Uncharted NES.


Comments

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

I bought the game and was banned for 72 hours, too.

Though they didn't call it a ban; they called it a UK release date.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

The exscapist has an update to the story.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.269975-No-Dragon-Age-2-for...


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

So, when are we seeing the Extra Credits guys interview with EA? I want to see what they answered back then, read this and the securom article and laugh my ass off.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

So for implying that EA are a power-hungry organisation who care more about their image than quality of service, they go ahead and pretty much prove it?

Who the hell is in charge of their PR department?

If EA believe being refererred to as 'The Devil' is bad, they obviously have very little idea of public perception of themselves.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

What I find especially hilarious is the bioware mod response. I bolded the interesting parts

"Please review the EA Community Terms of Service, particularly sections #9 and #11. There are two levels of enforcement here:

1. BioWare community bans are forum-only and can be for as little as 24 hours. These bans should have no effect on your game, only your ability to use all the features of this website/community. these bans are handed out by BioWare Moderators as the result of our travels around the forum and/or issues reported by fellow community members.

2. EA Community bans come down from a different department and are the result of someone hitting the REPORT POST button. These bans can affect access to your game and/or DLC.

Because the BioWare community now operates under the same umbrella as all EA Communities,
community members here have all explicitly agreed to abide by and be governed by both sets of rules. Consider it an added incentive to follow the rules you say you're going to follow.

If there are further questions or concerns, please send them to me via private message. Thank you.

End of line."

So he accuses Bioware of selling it's soul to EA, and gets banned by the new EA forum system which destroys his ability to play games. Ironic.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

And for just one more layer of irony, the mod's sig says "Be excellent to each other."


Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

A ban should always result in the lock down of comunication(forum,PMs,ect) but not the spftware on your game account.


I have a dream, break the chains of copy right oppression! http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/cigital-disobedience/


Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Let's renegotiate them.

---

Patreon

Deviantart

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

 And thus with both a ban and not allowing the gamer to play his LEGALLY BOUGHT game because of his opinion, bioware successfully CONFIRMS his opinion

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

I'm not convinced this was a deliberate action on either EA or Bioware's part.  Most likely an unforeseen consequence.  Something that should certainly be addressed though.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

That is my read on the situation.  My guess is they did not have 'banned forum account' in the DRM test plan and thus never got to see how the two systems interacted.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

Unforeseen or not, it's a situation that is completely unacceptable and totally the fault of the ridiculous DRM authentication systems in place today.  When the pirated version is clearly superior, not to mention free, guess which one people are going to opt for?  Oh, and it has SecureROM too, even though Bioware explicitly said it didn't.  Nice one, EA.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

No its not the drm. Most companies do not prevent you from installing a game even if you've been banned from the forums. This is a completly different situation altogether.

Re: Sassy BioWare User Gets Ban, Can't Play Dragon Age II

This.  Whether EA meant for this authentication scheme to lock forumgoers out or not doesn't really change the fact that the customer is now unable to play his legally-purchased game -- while, AND I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH, pirates have no trouble whatsoever playing it.

And of course let's not forget the dramatic irony of BioWare, in cutting off a user's access to a legally-purchased game for suggesting they were "in bed with the EA devil", has very effectively proven his point.

I'm a big fan of BioWare.  I'm looking at five of their games on my shelf right now.  I've won awards in their design contests and once applied for a job there.  I'm hoping they straighten their DRM policy out, because I will not buy another game from them if it includes SecuROM or can be disabled if I criticize EA.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilson@info depends on the sector. for example, have you looked at how powerful unions are in the public sector? I will make the argument they have too much power in that sector.07/07/2015 - 12:39pm
InfophileIt's easy to worry about unions having too much power and causing harm. The odd thing is, why do people seem to worry about that more than the fact that business-owners can have too much power and do harm, particularly at a time when unions have no power?07/07/2015 - 12:31pm
Matthew Wilsonthe thing is unions earned their bad reputation in the US. the way unions oparate the better at your job you are, the likely you want to be in a union.07/07/2015 - 11:33am
InfophilePut that way, "right to work" seems to have BLEEP-all to do with gay rights. Thing is, union-negotiated contracts used to be one of the key ways to prevent employers from firing at will. Without union protection, nothing stops at-will firing.07/07/2015 - 11:06am
Infophilehas an incentive to pay dues if they're represented either way, so the union is starved for funds and dies, unless things are bad enough that people will pay dues anyway.07/07/2015 - 11:02am
InfophileFor those who don't know, "right to work" laws mean that it can't be a condition of an employment contract that you pay union dues. That is, the right to work without having to pay dues. Catch is, unions have to represent non-members as well, so no one...07/07/2015 - 11:01am
MechaCrashUnexpected? Seriously?07/07/2015 - 10:55am
Mattsworknamejob they wanted without the unions getting involved. The problem is, it has some unexpected side effects, like the ones Info mentioned07/07/2015 - 8:49am
MattsworknameThe problem being, right to work states exsist specificly as a counter to Unions, as the last 20 or so years have shown, the unions have been doing this countries economoy NO favors. The right to work states came into being to allow people to work any07/07/2015 - 8:49am
Infophile(cont'd) discriminatory. This can only be done for protected classes which are outlined in law (race, sex, religion, ethnicity everywhere, sexual orientation in some states). So, a gay person could be fired because they're gay and have no recourse there.07/07/2015 - 7:27am
Infophile@Goth: See here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/firedforbeinggay.asp for a good discussion on it. Basically, the problem is that in the US, most states allow at will firing, and it's the burden of the fired person to prove the firing was ...07/07/2015 - 7:25am
Goth_SkunkAssuming that's true, then that is a fight worth fighting for.07/07/2015 - 6:58am
Yuuri@ Goth_Skunk, in many states being gay is not a protected status akin to say race or religion. It's also in the "Right to work" states. Those are the states where one can be fired for any reason (provided it isn't a "protected" one.)07/07/2015 - 6:07am
Goth_Skunkregarded as a beacon of liberty and freedom that is the envy of the world, would not have across-the-board Human Rights laws that don't at the very least equal those of my own country.07/07/2015 - 5:47am
Goth_SkunkI find that hard to believe, Infophile. I have difficulty believing employers can *still* fire people for being gay. I would need to see some evidence that this is fact, because as a Canadian, I can't believe that the United States,07/07/2015 - 5:46am
InfophileFor that matter, even women don't yet have full legal equality with men. The US government still places limits on the positions women can serve in the military. And that's just the legal side of things - the "culture wars" are more than just laws.07/07/2015 - 5:43am
InfophileAnd that's just LGB issues. Get ready for an incoming battle on rights for trans* people. And then after that, a battle for poly people.07/07/2015 - 5:41am
InfophileA battle's been won. In many states employers can still fire people for being gay. And in many states, parents can force their children into reparative therapy to try to "fix" being gay. Those battles still need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:40am
Goth_Skunkand now they've switched to battles that don't need to be fought.07/07/2015 - 5:37am
Goth_SkunkIn my opinion, it was the final legal hurdle denying homosexual couples final and recognized statuses as eligible spouses. But even though this war's been won, some people are still too keen to keep fighting battles,07/07/2015 - 5:28am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician