EA has replied to the lawsuit thrown at them by Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd. Unfortunately for them, the law firm has revealed some of the incriminating evidence they will be bringing to court, and it is damning.
In a statement to Gamespot, an EA representative stated that it was their belief that the claims are without merit. EA will be defending themselves in court, and they say they are certain the complaint will be dismissed.
The class action claim document indicates that thanks to EA’s “false and misleading” statements regarding the state of Battlefield 4 development, the company was able to raise its stock price. RGRD then verified that many of EA’s senior executives cashed in as much as $ 13.2 million worth of stock at these “inflated” prices.
Furthermore, RGRD alleges this was going on when they had their annual stockholders meeting July 31 of this year. In said meeting, they were able to approve retaining the entire board of directors, as well as increases to executive compensation and stock options.
In essence, RGRD has interpreted the narrative of Battlefield 4 development as part of an elaborate plan to commit fraud. If they are to be believed, RGRD intended to mislead the public into believing development was going far better than it actually was. They also intended to release the game at October 29 in time for the holidays, to meet revenue targets, and also to compete with Call of Duty Ghosts.
RGRD even has a list of EA’s executives, with information on how much shares they had sold at the time of Battlefield 4’s release. You can read the details in the official document here (PDF link), but I wanted to point out here that this now goes beyond vindication of disgruntled Battlefield 4 players.
This lawsuit could have huge implications for the gaming industry in the very near future. To be specific, it may affect the way companies hype up and talk about their games, how much they disclose about video game development, even how much information they leak about games in progress. It could also lead to more precedents about liabilities game companies have to consumers for releasing broken products. Without a doubt, this is one case the industry will be monitoring closely, and if you want to be in the know, you will be too.
