I bought the game to play classic mr. driller, which it still is.  The fact is doesnt have online play really doesnt bother me at all.  I'll shell out 10$ anyday for just the single player game, its 10$ freakin dollars.  Thats minimum wage in some states!!  Quit complaining, if you aren't happy with the game, maybe you shoulda waited til reviews came out instead of prematurley buying it.

I don't really mind either. I bought the game for some classic single-player Mr. Driller action. Having functioning multiplayer would've been icing on the cake, but the lack thereof doesn't bother me. Though I can see how folks who were mainly looking forward to the multiplayer aspect would be disappointed about it.

People buy different games for different reasons.  As such, many people purchased this game because they already own other versions, and specifically want the added/advertised ONLINE functionality.

People want their $10 back because they've technically been de-frauded by Microsoft and Namco/Bandai.  The original product description advertised local AND online multiplayer features - and currently, the game DOESN'T offer either of those.

You have a good point that $10 isn't much in high-priced world of video gaming; However, I think it's the principle of deceptive marketing and lack of QA that's upsetting the masses.  If people don't create enough of issue of this, then what's to stop developers from releasing more crappy/untested software in the future?

I imagine you'd have quite a different response in this tread if SINGLE PLAYER was broken, and multiplayer worked - right?

 ninja senses wrote:

I bought the game to play classic mr. driller, which it still is.  The fact is doesnt have online play really doesnt bother me at all.  I'll shell out 10$ anyday for just the single player game, its 10$ freakin dollars.  Thats minimum wage in some states!!  Quit complaining, if you aren't happy with the game, maybe you shoulda waited til reviews came out instead of prematurley buying it.

People buy different games for different reasons.  As such, many people purchased this game because they already own other versions, and specifically want the added/advertised ONLINE functionality.

People want their $10 back because they've technically been de-frauded by Microsoft and Namco/Bandai.  The original product description advertised local AND online multiplayer features - and currently, the game DOESN'T offer either of those.

You have a good point that $10 isn't much in high-priced world of video gaming; However, I think it's the principle of deceptive marketing and lack of QA that's upsetting the masses.  If people don't create enough of issue of this, then what's to stop developers from releasing more crappy/untested software in the future?

I imagine you'd have quite a different response in this tread if SINGLE PLAYER was broken, and multiplayer worked - right?

I Agree with Jason.  What if you ( the original poster ) downloaded the game because the description said offline single player mode.  Then when you started the game, found out that there was no single player mode.  That MS lied to you in their description, their webpages, their blogs, their podcasts, magazine pages, and the xbox live announcement pages, and the mr. driller webpage.

How happy would you be then? 

My family bought the game because it said offline multiplayer.  We don't care about the online. It will be a few months before broadband comes to this area.  Until then we have dsl.  We can't play online.  So we wanted an offline gameplay. MS advertised it. We paid for it.

Well there is none. 

So like Jason, I ask you to think.  How would you feel if you downloaded the game for single player mode and there was none? I bet you would be angry.  And you would have every right to be.  Well so do we.

it's called Mr. Driller Online, not Mr. Driller Single Player Experience Like the GBA.

ps. the main complaint link got locked due to it making kotaku among other things.  hopefully due to shame by the namco staff.  you guys suck at online you really do.

---

Things Are Explained In Great Detail

 JasonSuave wrote:

People want their $10 back because they've technically been de-frauded by Microsoft and Namco/Bandai.  The original product description advertised local AND online multiplayer features - and currently, the game DOESN'T offer either of those.

1.  the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. Thats the defination of fraud, you do not have a argument here. Miscomunication, poor quality control, terrible customer service does not constitute fraud.

2. You state the game does not feature online mulitplayer feature. You are wrong it does have online I have played several games, got my online acheivment and have had no issues with lag. There is no fraud here as clearly some people can play the game online.

3. The lack of Local Online player feature is also not fraud, regardless if it was stated to have it or not, poor quality control yes, Fraud no.You have to prove that Microsoft or Bandai got together and plotted to intentionally deceive you. The bottom line is with any purchase is a term I learned in first year law, Caveat Emptor, let the buyer beware. Microsoft's policy is clear there shall be no refunds, thats it, if they refuse to refund money not much you can do other then take your buisness elsewhere.

Now is there issues with the game? yes, Apparently they are being fixed. Should Microsoft or Namco tested there product  for quality prior to release? Yes they should have, but having poor customer service and Slow response to customer complaints is not a crime.

---

Gamertag: PrismaticSmoke
MS Server Side issues forcing a 2nd account for posting.

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

1.  the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. Thats the defination of fraud, you do not have a argument here. Miscomunication, poor quality control, terrible customer service does not constitute fraud.

The product description that says the game has local multiplayer, when the game doesn't have multiplayer.  I think you're trying to prove that this isn't fraud because an "inaccurate" product description could possibly be "unintentional"  Is that truly the case?  Maybe. But the fact that Namco wrote the description and Microsoft didn't validate it - well, I'd find it hard to prove that it was unintentional.

Also, my credit card company stated that the instance was considered fraud as well, and they agreed to reverse the charges of the microsoft points that I used to purchase the game.

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

2. You state the game does not feature online mulitplayer feature. You are wrong it does have online I have played several games, got my online acheivment and have had no issues with lag. There is no fraud here as clearly some people can play the game online.

The game does not feature LOCAL multiplayer, as the description stated.  Also, online multiplayer, for the most part, is broken.  That's pretty impressive that you got it to work, but I bet 90% of other people can't even play a single online game.  But, still, the heart of the issue is that Namco falsely advertised the local multiplayer feature.

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

3. The lack of Local Online player feature is also not fraud, regardless if it was stated to have it or not, poor quality control yes, Fraud no.You have to prove that Microsoft or Bandai got together and plotted to intentionally deceive you. The bottom line is with any purchase is a term I learned in first year law, Caveat Emptor, let the buyer beware. Microsoft's policy is clear there shall be no refunds, thats it, if they refuse to refund money not much you can do other then take your buisness elsewhere.

Again, I'm not arguing that there's a breah of contract here.  The Microsoft purchase agreement does state that if we buy the game, we're getting it "as is."  And the agreement doesn't state that we're entitled to refunds IF we later find out the product description was inaccurate.  So to your point, Microsoft does have their butt's covered and we're ultimately the people who are going to be screwed.  But I still say, if you're not happy, keep calling microsoft and demanding a refund - or if you can, have your credit card company reverse the charges.  We can't let publishers know that they can get away with crappy QA.

Yeah, most the people that are THAT bothered by it are those that A) prefer to play online always and B) Those who are huge Mr. Driller fans, who already have older versions, so they were specifically looking for the Online experience.

I fit into the B) category.  Though, I still care less than most of the others.  I really enjoy having the competitive leaderboards between my friends and I... plus it's the cheapest version of Mr. Driller around.

I only blame myself for not waiting a day to find out how the online play was working and to find out there was no local multiplayer (though, that's more Namco/MS's fault).

/I still think the 2.5 and 2.6 review scores are a little low.  Though, anything between 5.0-7.0 is justifiable on all fronts, IMO.

 JasonSuave wrote:

People buy different games for different reasons.  As such, many people purchased this game because they already own other versions, and specifically want the added/advertised ONLINE functionality.

People want their $10 back because they've technically been de-frauded by Microsoft and Namco/Bandai.  The original product description advertised local AND online multiplayer features - and currently, the game DOESN'T offer either of those.

You have a good point that $10 isn't much in high-priced world of video gaming; However, I think it's the principle of deceptive marketing and lack of QA that's upsetting the masses.  If people don't create enough of issue of this, then what's to stop developers from releasing more crappy/untested software in the future?

I imagine you'd have quite a different response in this tread if SINGLE PLAYER was broken, and multiplayer worked - right?

yea, you bring up some very valid points.

 DaSuperFunk wrote:

Yeah, most the people that are THAT bothered by it are those that A) prefer to play online always and B) Those who are huge Mr. Driller fans, who already have older versions, so they were specifically looking for the Online experience.

I fit into the B) category.  Though, I still care less than most of the others.  I really enjoy having the competitive leaderboards between my friends and I... plus it's the cheapest version of Mr. Driller around.

I only blame myself for not waiting a day to find out how the online play was working and to find out there was no local multiplayer (though, that's more Namco/MS's fault).

/I still think the 2.5 and 2.6 review scores are a little low.  Though, anything between 5.0-7.0 is justifiable on all fronts, IMO.

I think the 2.5 and 2.6 review scores are rediculous. We're dealing with an *excellent* arcade game whose online mode is - at the moment - broken. They could have put up a huge warning about the online fiasco and refuse to score that part but to downgrade a brilliant game to a 2.x is just laughable.

I agree about the weekly highscores though - I love those as much as in Pac-Man CE.
Unfortunately none of my friends plays Mr. Driller :(

 Shimrod65 wrote:

 DaSuperFunk wrote:

Yeah, most the people that are THAT bothered by it are those that A) prefer to play online always and B) Those who are huge Mr. Driller fans, who already have older versions, so they were specifically looking for the Online experience.

I fit into the B) category.  Though, I still care less than most of the others.  I really enjoy having the competitive leaderboards between my friends and I... plus it's the cheapest version of Mr. Driller around.

I only blame myself for not waiting a day to find out how the online play was working and to find out there was no local multiplayer (though, that's more Namco/MS's fault).

/I still think the 2.5 and 2.6 review scores are a little low.  Though, anything between 5.0-7.0 is justifiable on all fronts, IMO.

I think the 2.5 and 2.6 review scores are rediculous. We're dealing with an *excellent* arcade game whose online mode is - at the moment - broken. They could have put up a huge warning about the online fiasco and refuse to score that part but to downgrade a brilliant game to a 2.x is just laughable.

I agree about the weekly highscores though - I love those as much as in Pac-Man CE.
Unfortunately none of my friends plays Mr. Driller :(

my friends dont either, but I had some over and I was like its mr driller time, haha and they loved it.  Well send me a request if you guys wanna play(when/if it gets fixed)

2-3 review score is about accurate imo.  with online being in the title maybe a 0 to 1.0 would be fair.  the game is joke.

---

Things Are Explained In Great Detail

 Sonovius wrote:

2-3 review score is about accurate imo.  with online being in the title maybe a 0 to 1.0 would be fair.  the game is joke.

ditto.

---

*GrinCh MoB*

I think the score and reasoning for it is quite valid.  The game has problems.  The online doesn't work.  There is no offline multiplayer.

The single player has problems and issues. People have been reporting bugs and glitches on the official forums.  The game is broken.

MAybe a patch will somday come and fix the issues.  Maybe not.  But it is not the job of a game reviewer to look toward a patch or wait for a patch to review a game.  You look at the game as it is.  You look at the features it promises. You ask yourself, Does it fullfill it's product description?   In this case, no.  Online is broken.  No offline multiplayer.   You take points off for that.

How is the length and quality of play?  Short and not much new from older versions.  So no added points to the score.   How are the graphics?  Single player is ok.  Online, looks muddy and outdated.  No added points for that.

Is it fun?  Yes, for what little there is of the single player game.

The game fails on so many levels that the only reason it got a 2-3 average score is because some fun can be had for its limited single player game.  Everything else couldn't be reviewed because it isn't there or didn't work. 

I think the scores are completely justified.

---

Rudeness and Harassment are a weak man's imitation of strength.

Proud owner of: PS3, WII, & xbox 360

 JasonSuave wrote:

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

1.  the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right. Thats the defination of fraud, you do not have a argument here. Miscomunication, poor quality control, terrible customer service does not constitute fraud.

The product description that says the game has local multiplayer, when the game doesn't have multiplayer.  I think you're trying to prove that this isn't fraud because an "inaccurate" product description could possibly be "unintentional"  Is that truly the case?  Maybe. But the fact that Namco wrote the description and Microsoft didn't validate it - well, I'd find it hard to prove that it was unintentional.

Again it does not legally constitute fraud, no matter how you work it, justify it, word it, there is no fraud here, Case closed, end of story.

Also, my credit card company stated that the instance was considered fraud as well, and they agreed to reverse the charges of the microsoft points that I used to purchase the game.

Chargebacks can be made but there are laws and guidlines the must be followed. While you will get a credit if microsoft respondes to your chargeback and your claim is denied you will stuck with the charge back on your credit card. further since there is no 800 point package that I am aware of you can not get a refund for the full amount. You will most likely lose this case, and the bad news is if the chargeback is denied the bank places it back on your credit card, if that puts you over the limit your stuck with over limit fee's. Microsoft can also take actions against your account if they choose to, for instance they may no longer accept credit cards as a form of payment, they may turn off your account. I do not know how microsft will handle this. If they do not respond, you win, if they do you will lose and I will be very surprised if Microsoft does not respond.

Now your CC may have a feature that they will pay up to a certain amount if you feel the product or service was defective, but not all CC offer this and I would contact the CC ask them what their  policies are on this issue. it is up to you.

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

2. You state the game does not feature online mulitplayer feature. You are wrong it does have online I have played several games, got my online acheivment and have had no issues with lag. There is no fraud here as clearly some people can play the game online.

The game does not feature LOCAL multiplayer, as the description stated.  Also, online multiplayer, for the most part, is broken.  That's pretty impressive that you got it to work, but I bet 90% of other people can't even play a single online game.  But, still, the heart of the issue is that Namco falsely advertised the local multiplayer feature.

Broken Feature is not fraud. The product Description does not state Local Multipler support, the xbox arcade page does not advertise local multiplayer support so there is no false advertising. Howver Microsoft in good faith should allow people who purchased the product between the time that the product was mis labeled to request a refund of points, and they can remove the game access from your console, however they really are not obligated to do so. the fact that a error was made and timely corrected removes any and all doubt on a fraud issue.

 My Tag is Broke wrote:

3. The lack of Local Online player feature is also not fraud, regardless if it was stated to have it or not, poor quality control yes, Fraud no.You have to prove that Microsoft or Bandai got together and plotted to intentionally deceive you. The bottom line is with any purchase is a term I learned in first year law, Caveat Emptor, let the buyer beware. Microsoft's policy is clear there shall be no refunds, thats it, if they refuse to refund money not much you can do other then take your buisness elsewhere.

Again, I'm not arguing that there's a breah of contract here.  The Microsoft purchase agreement does state that if we buy the game, we're getting it "as is."  And the agreement doesn't state that we're entitled to refunds IF we later find out the product description was inaccurate.  So to your point, Microsoft does have their butt's covered and we're ultimately the people who are going to be screwed.  But I still say, if you're not happy, keep calling microsoft and demanding a refund - or if you can, have your credit card company reverse the charges.  We can't let publishers know that they can get away with crappy QA.

Sadley, Yes the way the system works, and the fact that they have many attorneys to craft and word these agreements to prevent such issues from arrising. Your recourse is to close your account. Should Microsoft step up and say hey your right, the description is wrong our mistake and refund your points? Yes they should but when your dealing with a company like microsoft, they really do not care becuase they offer a product that people will countinue to pay money for, regardless. I do think you went to the extreme on the CC reversal though only becuase  it is not worth the aggrvation it will create if microsoft decides to fight back.

Good Luck with your Chargeback though either way, Some people have a legit gripe depending on when they bought item in question.

---

Gamertag: PrismaticSmoke
MS Server Side issues forcing a 2nd account for posting.

I would have rather have paid $10 to play a direct port of the arcade version. Why are the in-game graphics so bad? I used to love this game, now i'm finding it a chore to play.