I don't know how anyone can defend EA's statement that if he ever opens a dispute again, they will ban him.
All I can say is, with consumers who shrug that one off, there just is no limit to what they will apparently take. So why wouldn't EA do this? They have people defending it.
Again, I don't believe we were given enough details by the OP. I'm not saying EA is the god send of game companies, I'm just saying there is probably a reason they did what they did. The reason I said not enough detail is I don't believe it's ever
, just not for this concern. Also, it depends on the rep you talk to. Some hate their lives and take it out on the people that call, others are more than willing to help. I'd say that if you get an a-hole of a rep, wait a few hours or a day and try again to get someone new.
But that doesn't make it right, just because it could happen with most companies. We are talking about a game, nothing too expensive to make such a big deal from, with all the money this developers/publishers/distributors are making with each sale, there shouldn't have to be a reason to banned you for no reason until they can find what's actually going on. I'm not saying that getting banned is a life/death situation, but come on, let the kid play until you resolve the issue.
You do realize that developing a video game costs them millions of dollars and they have to sell millions of copies to make a profit? They don't make that much per sale considering how much it costs to develop. The goal of a company is to please the masses in order to keep your consumers happy. If you have to temp ban one person to prevent them from hacking, phishing, etc, then that is something they are willing to do. Losing one person is better than losing hundreds. Now yes, if they abuse this it will end up causing more harm than good, but I'm just trying to shed light on why they do what they do, whether it seems fair or not.