Class Action Suit against Firaxis to get rebate?

[Ermak-]

Is that option is being explored by the people? There are numerous instances in which Firaxis plainly lied in advertizing their game. Does that not violate the Consumer Protection Agency laws? I think we have soild grounds for a lawsuit of defrauding by false pretences.

 

[aatami]

There are numerous instances in which Firaxis plainly lied in advertizing their game.

Which are?

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Is that option is being explored by the people? There are numerous instances in which Firaxis plainly lied in advertizing their game. Does that not violate the Consumer Protection Agency laws? I think we have soild grounds for a lawsuit of defrauding by false pretences.

People always want to try to sue companies for games they don't like. No, it doesn't work.

 

[Harvestmoon]

HAHAHAHAHAAH!

I didn't like Shayamalan's Airbender movie. Can we get up a class action against that, too?

WTH dude? You didn't buy "satisfaction", you bought a game that you thought you'd probably like. If you didn't, that's money wasted but it's no fault of the company that produced it.
Firaxis in no way guarantees that you won't be disappointed with the game. They advertised Civ V. You bought Civ V. You got Civ V. End of story.

 

[Ermak-]

Its not the satisfaction- it is lies about the product. It u promose something like " Babylonians in multiplayer' on an official game description and do not deliver -thats false advertisment.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Its not the satisfaction- it is lies about the product. It u promose something like " Babylonians in multiplayer' on an official game description and do not deliver -thats false advertisment.

I'd love to see how your $100,000 attorney will add up the damages caused by your pain and suffering.

 

[Harvestmoon]

Yeah, emotional damages. You deserve a settlement because Firaxis produced a horsehockey game and has an asstacular multiplayer.
You able to sleep at night yet, or are the nightmares still plaguing you?
FFS, get over it. Go play Mario or something.

 

[Senethro]

For all the number of times this gets mentioned unironically, I wish someone actually had the guts to do it.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

For all the number of times this gets mentioned unironically, I wish someone actually had the guts to do it.

The guts, and the cash, and the 3-5 years until it actually gets to trial, and the 5 minutes or so for the judge to throw it out.

 

[pat4]

The guts, and the cash, and the 3-5 years until it actually gets to trial, and the 5 minutes or so for the judge to throw it out.

Still it would be hilarious though.

Honestly the OP is deluded if he thinks there is any ground for this.

 

[Becephalus]

No its not being explored.

Companies do WAY WAY worse things than this regularly.

Best Buy for instance sells extended warranties and then changes the terms without notifying you after you have purchased them. That is legal.

So no, whining about a game you aren't crazy about does not warrant a lawsuit.

 

[Solo4114]

Probably wouldn't work.

Dissatisfaction alone isn't enough.

Merely missing one or two features isn't enough. That's industry custom, actually.

Basically, you'd need to prove that the game itself did not function -- like, if the game could not be installed by anyone, or if it crashed irrecoverably after about 5 minutes for everyone or somesuch. Think, say, Battlecruiser 3000AD upon initial release back in 1996 or so.

Even then, your damages would only amount to the cover price for the game. A class action suit to recover that kind of damages would be worthwhile, but only if you had a game that was really well and truly screwed and did not function.


So, yeah, not gonna happen. You've got a crappy game, sure, but it's functional on a sufficient number of systems that you can't really claim it doesn't work. It may not be fun, but they didn't promise you fun (and even if they did, that's likely to be deemed "mere puffery"). They promised you software that you could run. The end.

 

[Drakarska]

Probably wouldn't work.

Dissatisfaction alone isn't enough.

Merely missing one or two features isn't enough. That's industry custom, actually.

Basically, you'd need to prove that the game itself did not function -- like, if the game could not be installed by anyone, or if it crashed irrecoverably after about 5 minutes for everyone or somesuch. Think, say, Battlecruiser 3000AD upon initial release back in 1996 or so.

Even then, your damages would only amount to the cover price for the game. A class action suit to recover that kind of damages would be worthwhile, but only if you had a game that was really well and truly screwed and did not function.


So, yeah, not gonna happen. You've got a crappy game, sure, but it's functional on a sufficient number of systems that you can't really claim it doesn't work. It may not be fun, but they didn't promise you fun (and even if they did, that's likely to be deemed "mere puffery"). They promised you software that you could run. The end.

I think the OP is gearing more towards the "false advertising" aspect than any other option. Would be difficult to prove though.

 

[Becephalus]

I think the OP is gearing more towards the "false advertising" aspect than any other option. Would be difficult to prove though.

Like half the commercials on television have false advertising? You going to sue everybody?

 

[ImperialGuard]

OP, .... I agree with you that a lawsuit would be nice.....but I think they could spin the "false advertising" argument pretty well (e.g. we didn't say it would be there on release.....we released it 8 months later etc..)

 

[Drakarska]

Like half the commercials on television have false advertising? You going to sue everybody?

Nope. But it would be nice to have some buxom wench dressed in a pair of tight shorts and a really "straining" T-shirt to come over to my place with a six-pack .

 

[Solo4114]

Like I said, it's industry custom to promise a feature prior to release, and then not include it on release. You won't get anywhere with that.

 

[Moss]

Moderator Action: I don't see this thread going anywhere positive. While I wish we could have a civil discussion about such topics, past precedent says we cannot. Thread closed.