Independent gaming pressure group Gamers' Voice plans to report Activision to the UK's Office of Fair Trading (OFT) for allegedly releasing "unfinished" versions of Black Ops on PS3 and PC.
Gamers' Voice - founded in 2009 by MP Tom Watson and a former CVG site of the week - said it would give Activision a month to respond to its letter, and that if the publisher didn't it would be "forced to take matters further".
The month is now reportedly up, and Gamers' Voice is sticking to its word. Chris O'Regan, head of industry relations at the group, told IncGamers that it will report Activision to the OFT and hopes to see legal action brought against the publisher.
"As a result of their inaction we will test the might of government agencies against Activision," he said. "We can only hope this brings about some litigious action. These agencies do exist to protect our rights as consumers, let us see if they can fullfill their remit on this pressing issue."
O'Regan added: "GV wish to set an example with Activision to ensure games are not released in an unfinished state. If litigation is initiated, then a precedent would be set. In other words, publishers will have to reconsider releasing unfinished code in the future, in the UK at least."
Comments
32 comments so far...
KK-Headcharge78 on 21 Jan '11 said:
Good luck with that guys, hopefully our government will not be the limp wristed sack of s**t it usually is!
craiglackenby on 21 Jan '11 said:
Take em' to the bank!
HaloSucks on 21 Jan '11 said:
The thing is, they don't have a leg to stand on.
The game you pay for is the retail version of the single player. The multiplayer is viewed as a free add-on. And as far as the PSN is concerned, you don't pay any additional fee's for it.
It's not a subscription based game like an MMO, and even then, they have clauses which stipulate online features may be changed or ceased at any time.
It's pointless, i mean Activision are crooks and all for not fixing it, but legally, they can and most likely will get away with it. OFT will just ignore the moral behind it and Activisions lawyers will easily make mincemeat of the fact that these guys are calling the game "unfinished". Which it obviously isn't.
johnston29 on 21 Jan '11 said:
Cry babies. Go and get a girlfriend!
hi0marc on 21 Jan '11 said:
Certainly nice to see people stand up to the big players in the industry.
Will they win? i doubt it.
buckylovin on 21 Jan '11 said:
Sorry mate but thats balls your speaking. In no way shape or form can the multiplayer of Call of Duty be viewed as a free add on, even on the free PSN.
I do agree with you that the action is pointless though, even though Activision are robbing man whores!!
Im glad I still havent even played black ops, felt badly let down by MW2 online (enjoyed the campaign) and also let down by World at War in general. Decided to vote with my wallet and refuse to purchase Black Ops. Not that Activision care tho, they still sold a zillion copies I believe...
KK-Headcharge78 on 21 Jan '11 said:
HaloSucks is right on 2 counts, firstly Halo does indeed suck ass!, secondly since multiplayer is free it is an add on to the main game (i.e the singleplayer) Whether you view this as the case or not is irrelevant as Acti (and their lawyers) will clearly state that the primary product is the single player which is entirely finished, in addition they always state 'experience may vary with online play' in games which is basically lawyer speak for 'we won't be liable if you don't like or cannot access the game as was originally intended'.
One conflicting area could be that of achievements, perhaps you could argue that since the game comes with 50 achievements some of which can only be won via online play it could be argued that composite parts of the game experience are buggered and thus not complete- though this is pretty loose ground IMO.
Either that or buy an XBox as the game is largely fine online
TheCrimsonFenix on 21 Jan '11 said:
The online portion has you accepting terms and conditions yadda yadda when you sign online so if they're hoping that their "unplayable game" argument is going to win them with multiplayer technical problems, then they're pretty much f**ked. The developers and publishers are always going to fall back on the "we have a right to change this and that" defence. The single player game was certainly not unplayable. If everyone whined to the law about glitchy online games, almost every game since online gaming was born would be in the crossfire. People complain > People fix problem > Problem solved.
Mogs on 21 Jan '11 said:
Hope Activision gets a financial raping. They'll be OK though, just close another studio to reclaim any money lost in the few months until the next CoD comes along. Then the chavs will top up those numbers nicely once more and we shall have...peeeeeeace.
Channel4 on 21 Jan '11 said:
I still have no problems with it. I even own the PS3 and PC versions and haven't come across anything wrong with the multiplayer beyond issues what you'd normally expect from any game(ie. lag due to player connections and occasional disconnects). The pc version had compatibility issues but has since been patched and the PS3 version apparently has a slightly worse framerate than the 360 version but it's hardly as bad as Bayonetta is it?
This whole thing is blown massively out of proportion and is getting ridiculous now. Also it's not as if you can just buy a shooter these days and not pretty much end up with a COD clone is it? Medal Of Honour anyone?
@jim2wheels - Knowbody cared about the multiplayer until four came along. The first four COD games had excellent single player and that was the main reason to buy them for me. They've gone downhill since 4 but they all have at least half decent single players(I hated Black Ops though).
alexkidd on 21 Jan '11 said:
if this works out then all it will do is have the UK revert back to the old days of having to wait ages for a release over the US/JPN who can just patch after the fact. it'll be the 90's all over again.
we will have to import but most sites don't do that due to the lik-sing thing. the only place around that imports in London is Game Focus
GunstarHeroX on 21 Jan '11 said:
Why are people still talking about this heap of s**t? It came out 3 months ago and should have taken you 6 hours maximum to complete. It's over, and it wasn't anything special. Move on.
chronicwombat on 21 Jan '11 said:
even if nothing comes of this, the s**t stirring over it can only be a good thing and will maybe make developers/publishers think twice over releasing dodgy retail copies, just to avoid the bad publicity. maybe.
groble on 21 Jan '11 said:
This multiplayer is a free add on thing is a complete pile of crap. It is sold as a boxed product, you're paying for the whole package and if a part of that package is faulty then you have a faulty product. end of.
The whole ESRB warning of your experience may change online though is a valid argument
Imaduck on 21 Jan '11 said:
Roflcopter. Has any game company ever had this much s**t going on in court at the same time?! Deserve what they get. If ALL the cases against them win big time, they're in deep s**t. Hopefully a deep grave actually. They could still sell a turd to your average CoD fan though
saintbone on 21 Jan '11 said:
Even the single player was full of bugs! The amount of times I had to restart cause the guy i was following went awol! As for the multiplayer, it is included as part of the package. In no way can it be deemed free, and just because psn is free is irrelevent. It has got a lot of press because it has to be the most bug ridden game i have seen for a very long time. Activision are like microsoft when they kept denying the rrod. Im sure they will come out and fix it and grovel to the fans just in time for the new map packs coming out at £££££££££££!
kimoak on 21 Jan '11 said:
There were quite a few problems with the PC version at release. My friend bought his copy over to my house as he was having problems even running it. Tried it on mine and nothing. Just didn't work. Only games I have not gotten to work are really old games that weren't compatible with newer operating systems. That says alot right there.
Dandelion on 21 Jan '11 said:
Sorry to bust your bubble but the campaign sucked too, I had a harder time fighting lag, stutters and crashes than fighting the enemies, I reinstalled the game 3 times with all the patches and it's still s**t.
GlynCR on 21 Jan '11 said:
i don't know what the fuss is about.
i moved from 360 (MW2) to ps3 (BLOPS) and really haven't noticed anything different tbh.
single player was perfect for me (ending sucked though)
multiplayer has been good as ever. stop moaning and play.
if you don't like it, trade it and try MOH or BFBC2 both great
@ jim2wheels.
if you class multiplayer as the main game your wrong its always a bonus
ei8hty5ive on 22 Jan '11 said:
And rightly so. Power to the people I say!
duende667 on 22 Jan '11 said:
@jim2wheels: i agree mate,i'm sure GV will have no problem easily finding 100 people to testify that they bought the game solely to play it online but its beside the point,i think the point is now activision HAVE to take notice of their consumers.If anything this case will set some sort of legal precedent for the future.If its a favourable outcome for GV then any developer will have to think twice about releasing a half finished product.The majority of consumer right laws in britain are there to stop people being ripped off obviously,so i think GV may have a case if they can prove that was the case here.If all else fails GV could call sony for a quote....
jimsondanet on 22 Jan '11 said:
I wish you all the best GV
martinawatson on 22 Jan '11 said:
Yay, brilliant news Activision are going to compensate all the ps3 and pc owners with a free copy of first strike, Bobby Kotick has just released a statement , that went something like this
"Hi fans, We apologize sincerely for issues that gamers have encountered with different versions, we at this point have made , no word of a lie ,aprox $700+ million of pure profit (after all the development costs),so i am happy to announce the first strike dlc ,will be completely free......................actually no it wont, im going to f**k you up the arse , while laughing manically and putting my hand in your pocket stealing all your cash simultaneously .Looking forward to the monthly subscription based COD are you ,you bunch of bleeting sad sheep s**t encrusted dweebs"
,he then roared off in his new Ferrari ,pulling a moonie.
The Bossman on 22 Jan '11 said:
Strange then that my PS3 copy of B Ops works perfectly. All the connection issues I had were about a month ago. I DLed the recent patch, and now it works perfectly. Methinks this is just another group out to profit from Activision.
STE MO on 22 Jan '11 said:
This should be an open shut case. Acti have published a broken game and whether you think the multiplayer is an add on its still described on the Call of Duty website as "AN INCREDIBLY DEEP MULTIPLAYER EXPERIENCE" so with this you have consumer rights, which under the sale of goods act says "If you have bought goods you have a right to expect that they should be as described, fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality". Which of course it isn't!
So take Booby"big mouth"Kotick to the cleaners all you PS3 black ops owners.
Multiplayerking on 22 Jan '11 said:
They don't have leg to stand on. Should have been called Eileen.
peetay on 22 Jan '11 said:
I've been playing Black ops on PSN since it came out and had no issues whatsoever, along with all my mates. I don't know what all this fuss is about.
JammyJames on 22 Jan '11 said:
Couldn't have put it any better myself
jimsondanet on 22 Jan '11 said:
If you learn the origin of English democracy you understand that james's post couldnt have put it worse. Do you have any idea what drawn and quatered means friend?
Ninja Wolfman on 23 Jan '11 said:
They can add EA and all of the other publishers who patch their incomplete games, its been going on for years on the PC and still does, its just its become a massive deal nowadays due to the amount of people who now own consoles.
KryptoKnight on 23 Jan '11 said:
I've not had any off these issues with connectivity or offline bugs for single-player since I downloaded the patch either.
I guess Activision knows what sells,and what sells are their Call of Duty titles,and as long as they're helming that series,you can pretty much guarantee their titles will end up shipping incomplete with bugs and/or connection issues for multiplayer.
Augustus_aka_AG on 24 Jan '11 said:
I would love to see this case against Activision be successful, but it doubt I will. The only real way to make Activision pay, is to never buy another COD title again.