EA Not Banning Game Access for Forum Hijinks

By Chris Faylor, Oct 30, 2008 6:41pm PDT Update: EA community manager eaapoc, the bloke who started this whole affair, has acknowledged that his initial threat was "inaccurate and a mistake on my part."

"If we suspend or ban you from the forums, that does not affect your in-game account and certainly it does not impact your in-game account for other games," reads a new post. "I had a misunderstanding with regards to our new upcoming forums and website and never meant to infer that if we ban or suspend you on the forums, you would be banned in-game as well. This is not correct, my mistake, my bad."

Original Story: A forum moderator's threat that gamers could be banned from playing all of their EA-published games, such as Spore and C&C: Red Alert 3, for improper forum behavior was the result of a "misunderstanding," Electronic Arts tells Shacknews.

Explained Electronic Arts:

Posting in EA Forums is enabled by an EA Nucleus account -- but access to the forums and access to the games are separate. Players who have been banned from EA Forums are not automatically banned from online access to their other EA games. Players can be banned if they breach the Terms of Service or Code of Conduct in a forum, game or service. Each forum, game and service is managed independently by customer support representatives responsible for that specific forum, game or service.

A similar threat emerged earlier this year, after a Spore moderator threatened to ban users from the game if they discussed the title's controversial DRM on its official forums. EA quickly responded, explaining that post was made by an "over-zealous community volunteer" and was "absolutely not true or in-line with EA's moderation policy."

Click here to comment...

Comments

See All Comments | 14 Threads | 45 Comments
  • So I haven't used a work around like no-cd cracks in many years. I don't like the way EA screws with gamers. I was never fond of my games being tied to an online account to begin with. It started with Battlefield 2 which IMHO affected the whole gaming experience. Try going to a LAN party where a bunch of dumb guys can't remember their log on information. The good old days of slapping in your cd and firing up a LAN game was gone.

    Are these types of tools still available if I ever decide to use them. Yes, I buy all of my games but I'm tired of the overlords EA and Valve controlling how I access my games.

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 2 replies.

    • my main reason for not buying UT3 was because it was so tightly integrated with GameSpy's central servers. You couldn't play online unless you created a GameSpy ID, and you couldn't change your in-game name to something other than that GameSpy ID.

      It's really sad that the "good old days" of firing up a LAN game or connecting directly to a consumer-run server (whether it's public or run by a friend who invests the time and money to do it right [huge thank you to ashkie, themelon, and maddog]) appear to be over. It seems to be financially motivated by one or both of two points: DRM, and vendor lock-in. I hope we've covered the DRM part enough by now. The vendor lock-in covers many fronts: to make sure the online community isn't the wild west (which unfortunately leaves us "mavericks" out in the dust playing other games with no restrictions on clients and servers), and to foster a move to an environment akin to XBox Live, where there's e-commerce and charging for downloadable content. $50 for a game box isn't enough anymore, so they're hoping we will be content with $10 for a multiplayer map pack, or $10 for a level upgrade. They want the days of a single-box sale to be left in the dust because it doesn't work out for the company's bottom line.