Reminder: EA blatantly lied to us about Scenario Engine in Madden 20

[secondsolution]

Quote: Originally Posted by stinkubus

That's not a real thing. Or maybe I should sue Bud Light for tricking me into believing that all I need to do to score with swimsuit models is buy them a case of bad beer.

That is known as 'puffery' which is where a company makes an exaggerated statement that no reasonable person could think was real. This is completely legal.

Michael Young theorised different ways that the scenario engine would be used to mislead potential purchasers into thinking it would be a fleshed out product introducing elements like holdouts into the game. This was without a doubt misleading and deceptive to consumers

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

Did you just say false advertising isn't a real thing?

When they say the game will be sold for $40 but it’s sold for $60 everywhere.

[Sphinx]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

When they say the game will be sold for $40 but it’s sold for $60 everywhere.

The mode is not what we were lead to believe, however it exists as a mode. Therefore no false advertising happened here. It really is that simple.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sphinx

The mode is not what we were lead to believe, however it exists as a mode. Therefore no false advertising happened here. It really is that simple.

Unfortunately yes. One thing you’ll never get EA on is true false advertising.

[57oceanlover]

Simple fix. Stop Buying the game. EA doesnt care, its all about money.
Someone said something about EA being a small company? Really? LOL
Here is a game that STILL cant play on the field as well.as 2k5 or 2k8... wow.
Yet people who know little about football buy it When EA makes no money from it then maybe they will care...

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sphinx

The mode is not what we were lead to believe, however it exists as a mode. Therefore no false advertising happened here. It really is that simple.

The Game Informer article can very easily be argued to be a third-party editorial work discussing a creative target for a work-in-progress video game.

Since things change all the time during a video game's development, and also since EA's official first-party advertising and promotion of the finished product did not mention things people have called out from the GI article as missing, I have a hard time thinking anyone could provably get Tiburon for false advertising in a court of law. In fact I think it'd be a massive waste of time.

Whether that distinction means anything to you, a consumer, that's not for me to say.

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sphinx

The mode is not what we were lead to believe, however it exists as a mode. Therefore no false advertising happened here. It really is that simple.

Definitely true, I don't believe EA used false advertising. They do like any other product and talk it up too much, more than most, but they don't false advertise. That being said, false advertising definitely exists, which was the point of my post before this one.

[ggsimmonds]

Sorry to be this guy, but this isn't new from EA. Call it false advertising, overselling, or lying they've been doing it for years.