StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Gamers' Voice wrote:Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Call of Duty: Black Ops Video Games’ Failure to Function as Advertised

Gamers’ Voice is a consumer advice and lobbyist group that represents computer and video game consumers in the UK. As part of our remit, we are tasked with ensuring that the purchasers of computer and video games are given a fair hearing when they have a particular issue with a game they have bought. It is for this reason we are contacting you now, as we have been inundated with complaints from people concerning a particular title that was launched late last year.

On the 9th November 2010, Activision Blizzard, Inc. and its subsidiary, Activision UK Ltd, launched Call of Duty: Black Ops on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, PC, Wii and Nintendo DS video game consoles/formats in the UK. Since its launch, both the PlayStation 3 and PC versions of the game have been reported to be plagued by problems that are claimed to render it almost useless as the piece of entertainment the game purports to be. This is especially with regards to its multi-player online component. This is where the game utilises the internet to connect other players around the world to participate in the game, both cooperatively and in adversarial modes of play.

This element of the game is its major selling- point and can be the sole reason why people would purchase it. With it not functioning as intended, we can only conclude that as a product it is faulty and should not have been released in this state. To make a comparison to a more familiar product, it is akin to buying a fridge-freezer only to find that the freezer component doesn’t work.

The list of problems that have beset the multiplayer online component of Call of Duty: Black Ops are as follows:

* Sudden disconnections from online multiplayer game sessions
* Inability to join servers that play host to multiplayer game sessions
* Freezing of PlayStation 3 console, forcing the user to reset it
* Main menu freezing as the game is started on the PC version


Note that some of these issues could be generated by user error; however, we have carried out checks on these complaints and we have determined that this was not the case.

Sadly, this is not an exhaustive catalogue of issues people are having with this product. We have been contacted by people not only in the UK, but across the world regarding these issues. As such we feel compelled to contact you in order to lodge a formal complaint against Activision UK Ltd. and its parent company, Activision Blizzard, Inc.

This complaint is on the basis that Activision UK Ltd are in breach of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (as amended) which states that when a consumer buys goods they must be: as described; of a satisfactory quality; and fit for any purpose made known at the time of sale to the seller.

It is clear that Call of Duty: Black Ops for the PlayStation 3 and PC is not ‘as described’; of a satisfactory quality or fit for purpose i.e. to entertain, which was stressed at the time of its release.

We can provide you with copies of the correspondence we have received regarding this issue, if such documents were to aid you investigating it further.

We look forward to hearing from you soon.

Master_Baerne wrote:but because Activision has a lot more money and influence to throw at the problem than the complainer does.

So...because other games also have problems, it's stupid to complain about one of them?

Sarevok wrote:If there is no law there should be one. People payed for a service (multiplayer gaming) and if they are not getting it then they are being cheated out of their money.

PeZook wrote:Yes, I would argue the devs have an obligation to deliver a product without significant bugs, or at the very least to fix those bugs in a reasonable timeframe.

The producers have such an obligation with any other consumer product from cigarette lighters to cars and heavy construction equipment ; The fact many publishers managed to get away with releasing unfinished shoddy products on the market is irrelevant.

Obviously it's going to be hard determining the exact extent of their obligation ; Nobody should expect every game to be released perfect, as that's impossible ; However, when major parts of the game don't work as advertised, a buyer should have some means of recourse, no?

PeZook wrote:Why? ; If a major part of the game just plain doesn't work (it may not be the case for CoD, but Prototype, for example, just plain refused to work on some popular systems) it's a faulty product. A product doesn't need to be dangerous to fall under consumer protection laws.

And I do agree determining which is and which is not covered by those regulations is going to be a pain ; But it has to be done eventually.

Serafina wrote: Yes, some bugs are inevitable and so on. But if they are that bad that you can not access whole features of the game, then the product is faulty by any meaningful definition of the word. And it should be treated like every other faulty product.

General Zod wrote:

PeZook wrote:Why? ; If a major part of the game just plain doesn't work (it may not be the case for CoD, but Prototype, for example, just plain refused to work on some popular systems) it's a faulty product. A product doesn't need to be dangerous to fall under consumer protection laws.

And I do agree determining which is and which is not covered by those regulations is going to be a pain ; But it has to be done eventually.

You might be able to get customers a refund if the game doesn't work, but frankly I don't see what else you'd realistically expect to do besides that.

bilateralrope wrote:
Why wouldn't a refund be enough ?

It sounds to me like people are expecting the company to do a lot more than just provide a refund.

Zaune wrote:I believe the 'no refunds if packaging is opened' thing is because retailers only have the user's word that the game is faulty. How hard is it to burn a copy of the disc and then return it claiming it refused to run?

Vendetta wrote:However, under the terms of the Sale of Goods act, the retailer is under the legal obligation to prove that the product is not faulty until six months after purchase.

Zaune wrote:

Vendetta wrote:However, under the terms of the Sale of Goods act, the retailer is under the legal obligation to prove that the product is not faulty until six months after purchase.

Which would be extremely difficult, at least for PC games. A faulty batch of discs or a misprint on the minimum specs on the back of the cover are easy enough to resolve, but otherwise you'd need expert testimony from a computer technician who's done everything they can think of to get it running and still drawn a blank before you hit the civil standard of proof.