The class action lawsuit filed against EA accusing it of releasing "materially false and misleading statements" in the build up to Battlefield 4's launch "doesn't look good" for the publisher, UK law firm Sheridans has told The Guardian.
Commenting on the legal battle, which could go to court next year, Sheridans' Alex Tutty said: "This is a problematic case, and it doesn't look good for EA, simply from a PR point of view. Looking at the fact as presented by Robbins, Geller, Rudman and Dowd, there does seem to be a case to answer.
"However, we've only seen one side of the argument. Companies do give this sort of guidance, and it is important to be accurate, but it is just guidance based on what they know at the time. You'd have to prove that they knowingly gave false information, and it would be difficult to know about all the bugs that would crop up on the PlayStation 4 version. EA can probably produce a lot of evidence to suggest they didn't perceive the extent of the problem, or didn't have sight of it until after launch."
The lawsuit was filed by Robbins Geller on Tuesday - the same law firm, Tutty points out, that "handled the Enron class action" in the early 2000s.
"They are a securities law firm, this is what they do," Tutty says. "The firm obviously believes there is a case to answer, and in order to take it forward they need to find a plaintiff - someone who has suffered financial harm in this period due to purchasing shares on the basis of the statements made."
EA branded the lawsuit as "meritless" earlier in the week, and stated that it intends to "aggressively defend" itself against the allegations.
As well as being accused of releasing misleading statements about the strength of Battlefield 4, the lawsuit also alleges senior executives at the publisher of having sold shares at "artificially inflated prices".