12 Replies Latest reply: May 22, 2013 5:04 PM by UncleFizer RSS

Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?

wookie101

Maybe I have missed a similar post due to living my life or angsting over the latest decison made by Treyarch. But isn't there a line that has been crossed by removing Nuketown from the bonus content. This was after all the reward for pre-purchasing Black Ops 2 -which also gave the company's its projected sales data for the game.  I understand that we agree to the chance of changes to online game play at the whim of the makers- but in this instance i would consider this to be removing the reason for the point of sale from their advertising campaign, thus no longer making the product do what it was intended to do. In NZ a company would have to rectify this as a violation of the (NZ) Goods and Services Act. So, by removing it I would say has been a corporate criminal act.

So, as most of you aren't from NZ, but Aus, UK, Asia and US- what do you think?

 

Lawsuit anyone?

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    acm2010

    If you are talking about Nuketown being removed from the Bonus playlist section, The majority of the players wanted it in normal map rotation. Right now Nuketown is in the map rotation for Core and Hardcore, so a lawsuit will never happen. If this wasn't what you were talking about, be more specific then.

    • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
      wookie101

      I was specific. I said quite clearly  'bonus content' - to therefore clarify: yes, the bonus playlist then...to now further clarify: where Arms Race is now alone in its place...and yes it is in rotation- well done to you. However, it is no longer a stand alone playlist. It is no loner as earlier defined. Sorry for those who do have inference.

      So, yes on the original statement- it no longer does what it said it was going to do. Clear.

      • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
        jasonroloff

        You were promised the Nuketown map as a pre-order incentive to buy the game, not a Nuketown playlist.

         

        The Nuketown map is in normal rotation of maps. You have what you paid for. No more...no less. You can also play the map any time you want in private games.

        • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
          MrMill95

          Agreed. The Nuketown playlist was not even advertised before release, let alone promised. All that was promised was a free multiplayer map that is now in regular rotation. No laws have been broken. In addition, no part of the online multiplayer game is guaranteed if you read the terms and conditions. You have pretty much no rights and agree to that by playing online. It's unfortunate, but true.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    nicedrewishfela

    I would support you in this endeavor just to see the Judge laugh at you.

     

    It was a free incentive to Pre-Order. No playlist was promised. You were promised first access to the map, and nothing more. It is now in regular rotation. You can play the map anytime you want in Custom Games.

     

    Think, then post.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    r8edtripx

    wookie101 wrote:

     

    I understand that we agree to the chance of changes to online game play at the whim of the makers- but in this instance i would consider this to be removing the reason for the point of sale from their advertising campaign, thus no longer making the product do what it was intended to do. In NZ a company would have to rectify this as a violation of the (NZ) Goods and Services Act. So, by removing it I would say has been a corporate criminal act.

    So, as most of you aren't from NZ, but Aus, UK, Asia and US- what do you think?

     

    Lawsuit anyone?

    Others have said it already, that they only promised Nuketown, not the playlist.

     

    All that aside, I know you're aware of the TOS agreement we all "signed," (because you stated it in your comment) well it seems like this gives them the right to do whatever the hell they want.

     

    They could basically say we all need to clap 3 times and bark twice before we played, and we'd have to agree. ...and OF COURSE we're going to agree, because we really like playing COD! Let the mutes and one-handed players of the world be damned if they can't clap or bark.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    myevo8you

    I for one am GLAD they made it free to the public AND put it in map rotation. As a HC player only I was VERY ANGRY that when the game released it was under it's own playlist AND only core. When they added the map to download for free I was happy as now I could at least play custom games with my friends. Then a week or so later it was FINALLY added to normal map rotation in all modes and game variations.

     

    That being said, the Nuketown 2025 map was an INCENTIVE to pre-order the game, and it was not exclusive to any higher tiered set (i.e. hardened/prestige edition). The game itself was NOT altered in any way shape or form by adding this map as the basic functions of MP were and still are the same.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    m_inman

    Some people really have no idea about how law works.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    NoLifeKing29

    Go ahead and file your lawsuit, let us know how it goes. You aren't the first idiot to come on here and suggest it, yet somehow no one ever succeeds.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    SitRepPro

    wookie101 wrote:

     

    So, as most of you aren't from NZ, but Aus, UK, Asia and US- what do you think?

     

    Lawsuit anyone?

     

    Well, I guess under English law you could make a case that the deceptive advertising (so I heard, I was getting the game with or without Nuketown) procured more sales than they otherwise would have done had the adverts been honest.  Therefore, the companies have gained a monetary advantage via deception.  I didn't follow the advertisements much so I couldn't really comment further.  It is, however, no different to ISPs saying this up to download speeds milarky and they have got away with it for years.  That said, if you feel hard done by from this business decision then vote with your wallet.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    JunkChunk

    Ridiculous, sorry but it'll never happen. Play the game or don't play the game it's pretty simple. The lawsuit topic has been done to death.

  • Re: Why isn't anyone sueing Treyarch and/or Activision?
    UncleFizer

    Exactly what damages would you sue for?  The map didn't cost you any extra money.  Therefore you didn't lose anything and are entitled to nothing.