'Unfinished' Black Ops Reported For Government Investigation

An independent gaming pressure group has told IncGamers it is to report Activision to the Office of Fair Trading after the publisher failed to respond to an open letter regarding the buggy 'unfinished' versions of Black Ops on PC and PS3.

Gamers' Voice, which was founded in 2009 by MP Tom Watson, was set upto represent gamers in the UK by making their voice heard to government and mainstream media.

The organisation issued an open letter to Activision on December 22, revealing that they have been 'inundated with complaints from people who have bought copies of Call of Duty: Black Ops. They all concern the PlayStation 3 console and PC versions of the game.'

The letter asked Activision what they are going to do to 'recompense' buyers, giving the publisher one calendar month to respond. Activision, however, failed to do so.

Chris O'Regan, Head of Industry Relations at Gamers' Voice, told IncGamers: "As a result of their inaction we will test the might of government agencies against Activision. 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.

"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."

O'Regan said it could take 'months' for a formal government investigation, stating: "For the government agencies, months if they do start a formal investigation. For Activision, they may re-act a might quicker, although it will likely be a rebuttal and nothing more."

The news comes after IncGamers was told by Trading Standards thatbuyers should get a refundfor bug-ridden versions of the game.

source n4g...

This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. They should be compensated because the game isn't as good as they wanted?Stevo_the_gamer

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. They should be compensated because the game isn't as good as they wanted?MFDOOM1983

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. They should be compensated because the game isn't as good as they wanted?Stevo_the_gamer

Black ops is much more finished and polished then that turd Modern Warfare2. The online is actually balanced, were as in MW2 is was garbage.

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"] Selling a broken product is good?MFDOOM1983

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs. When I got Black Ops I was able to get online, I was able to play campaign and I was able to play ZOmbie mode, everything that was announced in the game I was able to play.

Black ops is much more finished and polished then that turd Modern Warfare2. The online is actually balanced, were as in MW2 is was garbage.

kozzy1234

The disconnects don't really bother me. What bothers me is the feezing. Hard resets arn't exactly healthy on the PS3. That's something Treyarch certainly needs to fix.

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Product is functional.kozzy1234

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs.

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Black ops is much more finished and polished then that turd Modern Warfare2. The online is actually balanced, were as in MW2 is was garbage.

BigBoss255

Defiantly dissagree, MW2 and COD3 are the two bad games in the COD series imo. MW2 the worst online FPS I have played in 20+ yaers. Horrible level design, unbalanced, terrible campaign. Glad COD series got back on trakc with Black ops, I was worried after the horrid MW2. Its almost unbelivable that the makers of MW2 actually made COD4... the difference in quality between thsoe two games is HUGE.

So what's their case here ? Couldn't this be applied to any crap game ? raiden509

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

megaspiderweb09

[QUOTE="megaspiderweb09"]

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

Stevo_the_gamer

Yup, they will get laughed at in court.

I bought black ops for PC when it came out. Complete waste of money, horrible stuttering problems that I couldnt do anything about. After 2 weeks of waiting for a patch to fix it I gave up and never tried to play it again.

No matter how innocent Activision is or is not, I hope it loses.

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="megaspiderweb09"]

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

kozzy1234

Yup, they will get laughed at in court.

um cool

i still cant play a full online game without a graphics crash/glitch where the whole game looks like a jagged picasso painting

I do think some of the issues with it's online are blown out of proportion, on the PS3 version anyways. I hear a lot of complaints about poor hit-detection and lag, two things of which I have never experienced (atleast none that I can remember). The disconnects were horrendously frequent before patches 1.04 and 1.05, but they seem to have gotten better. Again, it's mainly the freezing that I take issue with. That simply should not be happening.

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"] Maybe now but the game had some serious issues at launch. MFDOOM1983

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs.

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="megaspiderweb09"]

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

kozzy1234

Yup, they will get laughed at in court.

Thanks for calling me ignorant. Whatever the outcome of this case maybe,its still best that thier voice is heard. Encouraging a company as big as Activision to release unfinished products and cart away with £50 x Million people is just giving me the impression that you Sir need help

[QUOTE="raiden509"]So what's their case here ? Couldn't this be applied to any crap game ? Stevo_the_gamer

hey you go to the restaurant and ask for a 3 dishes menu. Happens the first dish was pretty bad, and when you ask for the second they say they couldn't prepare it because they messed up the ingredients, and the meat is rotten. But don't you dare ask for a compensation or refund, you already paid the meal and you have no rights! But here, have this yoghurt at $15 as a dessert. You thought the dessert was included? LOL.

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. They should be compensated because the game isn't as good as they wanted?Stevo_the_gamer

Your definition of functional is clearly not the same as everyone elses. The game is ass, and performs as such. Their main excuse is that most of the problems are found online, and the online isn't officially part of the product, as they can stop supporting it whenever they want. As such, nothing will come of this, other than a loss in sales of the next installment of the series.

hey you go to the restaurant and ask for a 3 dishes menu. Happens the first dish was pretty bad, and when you ask for the second they say they couldn't prepare it because they messed up the ingredients, and the meat is rotten. But don't you dare ask for a compensation or refund, you already paid the meal and you have no rights! But here, have this yoghurt at $15 as a dessert. You thought the dessert was included? LOL.

blitzcloud

[QUOTE="blitzcloud"]

hey you go to the restaurant and ask for a 3 dishes menu. Happens the first dish was pretty bad, and when you ask for the second they say they couldn't prepare it because they messed up the ingredients, and the meat is rotten. But don't you dare ask for a compensation or refund, you already paid the meal and you have no rights! But here, have this yoghurt at $15 as a dessert. You thought the dessert was included? LOL.

Stevo_the_gamer

Game with bugs, levels can be completed by doing nothing. Online with severe problems according to the gamers. I wonder... if online isn't an official part of the game, why can they charge for a product that only functions in said part of the game? (map DLC).

No way this goes anywhere. Releasing glitchy products and patching later is such a widespread and accepted practice that no one in their right mind could accept that Activision acted in bad faith here.

That said, I would like to see some legislation that guarantees one the ability to return buggy/broken software for a full refund -- the "you can't return an opened piece of software for a refund, but you can't tell if a piece of software works without opening it" catch-22 is pretty damn ridiculous.

Your definition of functional is clearly not the same as everyone elses. The game is ass, and performs as such. Their main excuse is that most of the problems are found online, and the online isn't officially part of the product, as they can stop supporting it whenever they want. As such, nothing will come of this, other than a loss in sales of the next installment of the series.

Pug-Nasty

your xbl dollars at work.

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Product is functional.kozzy1234

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs. When I got Black Ops I was able to get online, I was able to play campaign and I was able to play ZOmbie mode, everything that was announced in the game I was able to play.

Am I the only one that remembers gaming before the internet became a mainstream function of it? Developers used to have to ship games that worked properly and finding one that was virtually unplayable the day you got it almost never happened. Now, developers can rush a product to release because they can just patch it up a week or so after the consumer has already paid for it. Why on earth would anyone want to defend this type of lazy salesmanship? If a law-suit gets companies to actually release finished products, how does this somehow hurt you in any way?

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"] Maybe now but the game had some serious issues at launch. Game-fu

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs. When I got Black Ops I was able to get online, I was able to play campaign and I was able to play ZOmbie mode, everything that was announced in the game I was able to play.

Am I the only one that remembers gaming before the internet became a mainstream function of it? Developers used to have to ship games that worked properly and finding one that was virtually unplayable the day you got it almost never happened. Now, developers can rush a product to release because they can just patch it up a week or so after the consumer has already paid for it. Why on earth would anyone want to defend this type of lazy salesmanship? If a law-suit gets companies to actually release finished products, how does this somehow hurt you in any way?

Help me ask this dude"kozzy1234" who called me ignorant

Call of Duty = serious business.:P

WTH???? No one force them to buy a buggy game. This is ridiculous. Don't like it? Don't buy it. Gosh.magicalclick

[QUOTE="Game-fu"]

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Every game has an issue or two at launch.. look at RDR... the first day I played that game I saw 4 flying women that talked as if they were horses and many other issues. That game is still wicked and even won GOTY, dispite TONS of bugs. When I got Black Ops I was able to get online, I was able to play campaign and I was able to play ZOmbie mode, everything that was announced in the game I was able to play.

megaspiderweb09

Am I the only one that remembers gaming before the internet became a mainstream function of it? Developers used to have to ship games that worked properly and finding one that was virtually unplayable the day you got it almost never happened. Now, developers can rush a product to release because they can just patch it up a week or so after the consumer has already paid for it. Why on earth would anyone want to defend this type of lazy salesmanship? If a law-suit gets companies to actually release finished products, how does this somehow hurt you in any way?

Help me ask this dude"kozzy1234" who called me ignorant

It's called fan-boyism to a fault.

Completely fair point if you ask me. If you bought anything else and it was chipped of scratched etc, you'd want something done about it. Bit of an exagurated comparison but the point still stands, you'd either want your money back or you'd want it fixed. Yes they can apply patches etc, but i still believe devs are in such a rush to get their games out and make mo money they sacrifice quality.

Games are getting pretty expensive, for what you are paying you'd expect it to work properly, and we as consumers have a right to submit such a complaint.

I think people should learn to be considerate before they jump to conclusions about the game been functional and this claim been silly. My friends in the UK have COD BlackOps and despite all the recent patches,they can barely get a game rolling till the end without a bug or two so just because yours is functioning perfectly doesnt mean some other peoples complains are silly. Stop been insensitive and ignorant END OF RANT

megaspiderweb09

Runs like crap for me too... Im in UK and it's a complete joke, i didn't pay full price for half of the game, you wouldnt buy a car to drive if it broke down every 2 minutes so why buy a game that does the same? It is designed with multiplayer in mind yet that is the lacking part. People saying to stop crying either don't have the game or are so selfish they couldn't care less about other peoples experience, i would accept a refund and burn the disc if Activision would do it, not just that but the game has given Treyarch a bad reputation now especially after the sabotage reports either that or they are just a "It wasn't our fault, a big boy did it and ran away!" excuse. I don't know but i'd like to think they can fix it, i cant get a LAN going, multiplayer is buggy as hell and if i do get a reasonably playable game i get disconnected or the game crashes.

doesnt matter

ps3 and Pc gamers will rush out and buy the next Cod in millions, than complain again, buy the $15 map packs, rinse and repeat, gamers have no backbone

i also heard rumors that microsoft paid activision to make cod worse on other platforms, not sure how true that is, but i wouldnt be surprised at all

[QUOTE="MFDOOM1983"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. They should be compensated because the game isn't as good as they wanted?Stevo_the_gamer