Close
Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

EA defends always-online SimCity

EA defends always-online SimCity

Fri 15 Mar 2013 9:06pm GMT / 5:06pm EDT / 2:06pm PDT
OnlinePublishing

Maxis GM Bradshaw says offline mode "didn't fit with our vision", fans fire back

The SimCity launch saga is well into its second week, and Electronic Arts added another chapter today with a note to fans on its company website. In an update titled "Straight Answers from Lucy," Maxis general manager Lucy Bradshaw provided her explanation for why the game requires a constant Internet connection.

"It didn't come down as an order from corporate and it isn't a clandestine strategy to control players," Bradshaw said. "It's fundamental to the vision we had for this SimCity."

She added that the connection allows EA to keep the simulation state current for all players, handle cloud saves, and enables social features like cooperative challenges and a global supply-and-demand market. Additionally, Bradshaw said it protects the integrity of features like achievements and leaderboards. Put together, she said the online features made the game almost like a massively multiplayer online version of the series.

"So, could we have built a subset offline mode? Yes," Bradshaw admitted. "But we rejected that idea because it didn't fit with our vision...The SimCity we delivered captures the magic of its heritage but catches up with ever-improving technology."

A number of upset fans in the comments section to Bradshaw's update were not assuaged by the explanation. As one user going by the handle klymen wrote, "With all due respect, to write an article about why the new SimCity has to be always online and not to mention DRM or the anti-piracy measure even once, is dishonest and downright disrespectful. It seems like that you don't think very highly of your audience. Yes, the DRM issue is a sensitive topic, but to avoid it, not to mention it as one of the reason why SimCity is always online, shows absolute disconnect and contempt for your fans. We're not stupid."

43 Comments

Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic

1,584 1,438 0.9
See also this:

http://kotaku.com/5971235/cloud-computing-is-why-the-new-simcity-needs-an-always+on-connection-studio-says

and this:

http://www.simcity.com/en_US/blog/article/The-Benefits-of-Live-Service

It's still a shockingly short-sighted thing to do. And obviously the servers aren't going to run indefinitely, so what then? Of course, no answer for that. Yet.

Also, does anyone else find this sentence amusing:
The SimCity we delivered captures the magic of its heritage but catches up with ever-improving technology.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 15th March 2013 9:35pm

Posted:A year ago

#1

Paul Smith Dev

189 154 0.8
I'd like to know why having an offline mode didn't "fit with their vision", What even was their vision?

Posted:A year ago

#2

Todd Weidner Founder, Big Daddy Game Studio

414 984 2.4
Dictating to,and telling your customers what they are suppose to want,yeah thats a recipe for disaster.

Here's something they must not teach MBAs anymore.. listen to your customers. If they say I want bigger cities and to be able to play offline , you reply " Ok we will look into getting you those options in the future'. How hard is that?

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Todd Weidner on 15th March 2013 10:03pm

Posted:A year ago

#3

Paul Jace Merchandiser

939 1,420 1.5
Whatever EA's vision for this game was I don't think this was it.

Posted:A year ago

#4

Klaus Preisinger Freelance Writing

1,135 1,171 1.0
I feel sorry for Bradshaw having only the toolset or PR-speak to deal with this.

The list of bugs is just utter desolation, even without the disabled features and DRM issues:
http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/9352838.page
I'd say this list kills the game right there, the DRM does the same for Origin as a service.

I bet next week's Internet meme will be "I paid 60 bucks for Sim City and all I got to work was this free copy of Dead Space".

and still I want to like the game, but the abuse is just too much. Great potential reduced to dust. If it was an MMO, I'd say I try again in a year, but the reality of boxed products is a different one.

Posted:A year ago

#5

Greg Wilcox Creator, Destroy All Fanboys!

2,193 1,170 0.5
As I keep saying, non-gamer execs talking about how good and well stuff is with double blinders while Rome burns on is NOT a good thing for this industry.

Posted:A year ago

#6

Mary Hilton Community Manager, Reclaim Your Game

38 20 0.5
@Paul Trillo:
" I'd like to know why having an offline mode didn't "fit with their vision", What even was their vision? "
Lots and lots of money for minimal effort, lots of BS involved in it.

I wonder if anyone at EA's upper management (besides Lucy Bradshaw, who's clearly out of her depth in this one) even has been on-line in the last 2 weeks. Does nobody even notice the incredible mass backlash going on? Doesn't anyone have an internet connection that works?
Kind of like the Titanic sinking...but far slower, and inevitable, nonetheless.
This has to be one of the most badly managed PR disasters in recent memory.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Mary Hilton on 16th March 2013 7:16am

Posted:A year ago

#7

Dan Howdle Head of Content, Existent

280 810 2.9
Popular Comment
because it didn't fit with our vision
So we're actually employing the language of religious revelation now?

What vision was this? Did the desert Djinn bestow this edict? Did God manifest stone tablets with 'thou shalt not play offline' written thereon? Note the language here. It's fluffy, fuzzy and without substance. As if the the notion of the 'vision' is beyond reproach. 'Ah,' you're meant to say, 'the vision. Please forgive us our disrespect.'

And even if the connotation lacks deliberate religiosity, at the very least she is professing artistic infallibility in deflection of legitimate customer concerns. I am in justified awe of EA's chutzpah.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Dan Howdle on 16th March 2013 7:52am

Posted:A year ago

#8

Tom Keresztes Programmer

683 335 0.5
In marketing, customer is king, and is always right.
How did they managed to forget that?
They should be saying "We are really sorry that you are stressed, but we will fix it as soon as we can"

Posted:A year ago

#9
Guilty conscious:
>"It didn't come down as an order from corporate and it isn't a clandestine strategy to control players," Bradshaw said. "It's fundamental >to the vision we had for this SimCity."

Fundamentally it had nothing to do with that - it was part of the "EA Market Approach" document (that all developers for the corp have to abide by) that looks at the greater motorization of the business for the corporations future - period!

Posted:A year ago

#10
Recently we have seen AAA developers and publishers amazingly trying to defend the indefensible.

Be it the developers and SEGA trying to dodge the criticism over Colonial Marines. EA and developer dodging the bullets over DRM and constant online. Or Nintendo trying to ignore the reality of their Wii-U presentation and performance. We now have to agree that the majority of these failings have been of the executives own making, and will send alarm bells ringing with investors concerned with the abilities of those tasked with the videogame industries future.

As an interested party looking at the business model, I am struck how the posturing language is near identical to the corporate double-speak that surrounded the 1984 (E.T.) collapse, and again in 1994 (Rise of the Robots) with the mini-crash. Are these guys not looking at their history and learning?

Is this all shaping up for 2014, and another cataclysmic misjudgement by executives (hardware and software) and the inevitable public retribution?

Edited 1 times. Last edit by kevin williams on 16th March 2013 12:53pm

Posted:A year ago

#11

Matt Ernst Studying Culinary Arts, Hennepin Tech

24 20 0.8
EA's damage control is so bad, it's hilarious.

Posted:A year ago

#12

James Prendergast Research Chemist

735 432 0.6
@ Kevin:

Is it retribution when all's your doing is removing yourself from an abusive relationship? :)

Also, I agree. Though I think the indie scene and mid-level developers have a lot to gain if this goes down. The big will become smaller due to lack of faith and business from their previous customers but the content will still be made on smaller, cheaper budgets that are realistic compared to the expected return on investment - which is not what the AAA publishing industry has been doing.

Posted:A year ago

#13

Peter Moore Chief Operating Officer, Electronic Arts

15 94 6.3
Popular Comment
@Dan comments: "What vision was this? Did the desert Djinn bestow this edict? Did God manifest stone tablets with 'thou shalt not play offline' written thereon? Note the language here. It's fluffy, fuzzy and without substance. As if the the notion of the 'vision' is beyond reproach. 'Ah,' you're meant to say, 'the vision. Please forgive us our disrespect.'..."

Let me try to help you understand the language employed by those in the creative development community. As every executive producer or creative director will tell you, you need to create a "vision" for the game that informs the narrative, the character development, game mechanics, etc, etc. This becomes your North Star by which the development team scopes their work and arrives at the end state experience for the gamer. You are confusing this carefully thought through objective to something that reveals itself to the EP in a dream or some other altered state of consciousness. Really?

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Peter Moore on 16th March 2013 6:05pm

Posted:A year ago

#14

Sam Maxted Journalist / Community / Support

155 65 0.4
EA's damage control is so bad, it's hilarious.
When developers need to post a trailer for a basic game mechanic set to be part of a post-release patch... you've got a serious problem.

Posted:A year ago

#15

Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic

1,584 1,438 0.9
@ Peter

So, are you trying to say that the end-result of Sim City is entirely in keeping with the vision that Maxis had? It seems peculiar to say
you need to create a "vision" for the game that informs the narrative, the character development, game mechanics, etc, etc. This becomes your North Star by which the development team scopes their work and arrives at the end state experience for the gamer.
when the "end state experience" of Sim City has been so poor up to now (and I don't mean just the server experiences, but the pathfinding, the resource management, the population fudging...).

I'm not trying to catch you out here, it's just a follow-up to Dan's comment regarding the use of the word "vision". :)

Edited 3 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 16th March 2013 9:19pm

Posted:A year ago

#16

Paul Shirley Programmers

178 150 0.8
Popular Comment
Who cares what their 'vision' was?

What about the players 'vision' of a game they can play when, where and how they like?
Of saving games where, when and how they like?
Of opting in OR OUT of the publishers 'vision'?

...but it's all corporate bollocks, invented after the fact, not even describing their real vision of unbreakable DRM and rentalised games. A future where users are treated even more like a herd of farm animals to be harvested.

Posted:A year ago

#17

Morville O'Driscoll Blogger & Critic

1,584 1,438 0.9
What about the players 'vision' of a game they can play when, where and how they like?
Of saving games where, when and how they like?
Of opting in OR OUT of the publishers 'vision'?
What do you think this industry is? Something that caters to the consumer like they're a valuable commodity? Heavens no.

Sarcasm aside, expecting consumer-friendly acts from anyone other than GOG/CDProjecktRed, DoubleFine and (possibly) Valve, is just going to get you disappointment.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Morville O'Driscoll on 16th March 2013 9:46pm

Posted:A year ago

#18

Laurens Bruins Jaywalker, Jaywalkers Interactive

135 158 1.2
Popular Comment
@Peter Moore; I think Dan's point is that, unless this vision came from divine revelation, there's no point clinging on to a vision that's a bit blurry and gets everyone mad. Why Sim City is disappointing is not relevant to the consumer and won't change the fact that it is. Stating the game requires a connection to simply function which doesn't seem true upon closer inpection and talking about always online being part of the vision from the outset which also doesn't seem to be the case, definitely won't. A proper offline mode and city size probably will. ;)

I would really like to play SimCity, but seeing the backlash I don't yet feel inclined to buy it.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Laurens Bruins on 17th March 2013 12:53am

Posted:A year ago

#19

Jose Martin Entrepreneur & Financing - Media / Tech / Interactive Entertainment

23 19 0.8
My God, watching this mess play out over the last couple of weeks for such a beloved franchise has been painful - it's like watching a city expand and grow in super slow motion - if EA could just implement "Cheetah" speed in real life, this disaster would surely be behind them by now. ;)

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Jose Martin on 17th March 2013 12:42am

Posted:A year ago

#20

Saehoon Lee Lead technical artist, Kuno Interactive

50 3 0.1
I noticed yesterday, that aroind 70-80% of the servers were full. I mean. What the heck does ea wants us to do... Sit and wait for someone to go away so i can continue my own save games? I am not sure what the capacities of these servers are but having to restart city on another server because they are full is just.. So bad. .. I have almost never encountered mmo that you cant play. Because the ser you joined already has run out of capacity. And even if. There was no server problems the game's core feature of region and cities working together just doesnt work. If you visit ea simcity forum the main complaint is not only with DRM but the main core game machanic which is broken in so many ways.

Posted:A year ago

#21

Andreia Quinta Creative & People Photographer, Studio52 London

225 591 2.6
@ Peter Moore

I agree Dan twisted the concept of "vision" pretty much there with applying religion to a word that is not necessarily connected to it and has a broader concept than that. But regarding the game itself, please stop defending what even you know (hopefully) is a twisted outcome of what that game should have been. Customers...
...Pardon, 'consumers' aren't happy with the outcome, EA issuing an apology and apply fixes to poor - let's call it "vision-choices" - would go a long way in EA's PR portfolio than sugar-coating and defending this just for the sake of defending, it's ok, I'm sure investors aren't reading this.

But who am I kidding, EA has no idea how to PR.

On the other hand, Kevin and Laurens are right on the money with their comments in my opinion.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Andreia Quinta on 17th March 2013 5:14pm

Posted:A year ago

#22

Samuel Verner Game Designer

131 243 1.9
Popular Comment
EA's PR is awesome! saying that the customer just does not get their vision is basically the same thing like saying "the design and our descissions are beyond the low intelligence of the crowd. they don't get our brilliance and so its their own fault that they dont like it!"

Posted:A year ago

#23

Klaus Preisinger Freelance Writing

1,135 1,171 1.0
Game Developer's Lament:

Guided by the stars I found myself tripping over a mountain made from ambitions, not all of which were entirely my own. As I lay there with eyes closed the passersby envied me even in death, for I had awoken in another dream. Sleep tight tonight, after a million dreams we shall meet again.

Posted:A year ago

#24

Dan Howdle Head of Content, Existent

280 810 2.9
@Peter

As Laurens says up the thread, I was questioning the use of artistic reasoning in this instance. That the way things have played out - from the perspective of an outside observer operating on admittedly limited information - seem to be the result of a series of business decisions, rather than any that might be considered creative, artistic or aspirational.

Such spin makes it very hard for us to criticise - if indeed we feel criticism is justified - and therefore feels more tactical than heartfelt. We must dig ourselves from beneath implicitly untouchable artistic conceptions before the discussion might continue. And so it feels more a deflection or distraction than it does an acceptance.

That you're here, involving yourself in the debate is appreciated. Credit where credit is due.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Dan Howdle on 18th March 2013 9:46am

Posted:A year ago

#25

Isaac Kirby Studying Computer Games Development, University of Central Lancashire

40 37 0.9
In Response to Peter Moore, i tihnk its great that creative teams have a Vision of thier own to nurture and develop.
But equally consumers have visions, of what they think a product should be.
The 2 will almost never match up entirely, but the top points of a consumers vision is normally being able to play the game as quickly and with as little hassle as possible. I tihnk when little things don't add up they can be forgiven easily. But for them to spend thier money and not even have your vision playable is a disappointment to them, and must be frustrating for you.
I am deeply sorry for the previous wording of my post, my keyboard was hitting full gallop before my brain was in the saddle.

Edited 2 times. Last edit by Isaac Kirby on 18th March 2013 11:40am

Posted:A year ago

#26

Rick Lopez Illustrator, Graphic Designer

1,269 942 0.7
Dont know what there vision of the game is, dont understand the need for always online, I just know Im not spending a penny on this damn game. I dont support the idea of always online games unless its necessary by design, such as the case of multiplayer or MMO. And Im not talking about making a game always online by shoehorning a mediocre multiplayer as with Ninja Gaiden 3 or Tomb Raider. I expect the single player portions to work offline. Its just an excuse for a draconian form of DRM. I also find it wrong when people paid full price on the game. Its like you pay $60.... but its not really yours. So why pay full price. I really doubt the suits making these decisions actually play games.

Edited 5 times. Last edit by Rick Lopez on 19th March 2013 11:55am

Posted:A year ago

#27

Jose Martin Entrepreneur & Financing - Media / Tech / Interactive Entertainment

23 19 0.8
@Renaud: I agree with your sentiments about respect but it seems Isaac is just expressing the frustration many gamers across the world are having with this buggy, broken mess EA pushed out the door. While he is clearly upset with the perceived ill treatment EA has shown to it's loyal customer base...he certainly doesn't sound like a schoolyard bully taunting Mr. Moore. There was nothing in his comments that attacked Mr. Moore personally, everything dealt with fatal flaws in this "vision" of SimCity.

Given the outright falacies put out by EA/Maxis regarding the offloading of heavy sim calculations onto the servers (a blatant deliberate misrepresentation) as a reason for an always online requirement, you can hardly blame the customers (who laid out $60-$80) for their raw emotions.

At it's core, as the Eurogamer review points out, the entire simulation breaks down once you dig deep into it and your city starts growing past a certain point...fatally broken Ai & pathfinding, broken economy system that renders careful city planning a moot point due to the randomness of events that have no relationship to those systems, online region sharing that barely functions in many sessions, lost cloud saves, no rollbacks or undo functions... It really does almost seem to the fanbase as if EA purposefully released a product they knew to be deeply flawed and broken, in the hopes of scoring a big payday and patching what they could as time passes.

I am not claiming that, but the more I read comments coming from the fans, the more it seems like that scenario actually has traction among a growing percentage of consumers.

It strains credibility that so many broken systems and bugs could have passed in-depth internal testing of Alpha and Beta builds. So while you may have taken Isaac's comments as disrespectful and felt the need to scold him, the industry would be doing itself a great disservice by not understanding his frustration, which is spot on and reflects the feeling of millions of fans.


http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/12/simcity-server-not-necessary/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-03-15-simcity-review
http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/wow-did-everyone-see-this-yet-this-game-is-so-fundementally-broken.452923907/
.

Posted:A year ago

#28

Dan Howdle Head of Content, Existent

280 810 2.9
I agree with the sentiments posted above. Peter doesn't have to be here talking about this; that he is should be met with both gratitude and due respect.

Posted:A year ago

#29

Robin Clarke Producer, AppyNation Ltd

321 748 2.3
It seems that EA didn't learn anything from Spore. Corporate edicts are the antithesis of creative vision.

The decent thing to do at this point would be to apologise to customers who have been let down and pledge to extricate Sim City from the broken DRM system that has been foisted upon it while there is still any goodwill left for the brand.

The threat of a class action lawsuit should not be the only sufficient motivation to do the right thing by the fans.

Posted:A year ago

#30

Isaac Kirby Studying Computer Games Development, University of Central Lancashire

40 37 0.9
I have since reworded my post. I agree with Renaud that the wording was quite hamfisted, and the point on respect your elders is one that is duely accepted, noted and will be learned from. Believe me I do not want to offend/disrespect Peter Moore, but this launch has raised alot of talking points.

Posted:A year ago

#31

Jose Martin Entrepreneur & Financing - Media / Tech / Interactive Entertainment

23 19 0.8
@ Dan: Fair point, again, I don't feel Isaac was really disrespectul, simply expressing the frustration of a fan....on the other hand, I question the term "gratitude" - I'm envisioning the scene from "Oliver" > "Please sir, I'd like some more" - at what point should the head of a company truly be held to account and answer for not respecting their own fanbase? Should we be grateful that EA alllowed us to Beta Test SimCity for them and stress test their servers and pay $60-80 for the privlege? Or should we be grateful that Mr. Moore felt the need to come on to this site and explain what "vision" means in the creative community...seriously - with all the problems this launch has had and all the broken systems the game possesses, many of us would have appreciated much more candid comments from Mr. Moore about how and why this happened and his reassurance that he will do everything in his power to justify the money spent on what is basically a broken, barely functioning product...

Should we all express our deep gratitude if Randy Pitchford came on to these boards and explained with a straight face, what "vision" means in regards to "Aliens: Colonial Marines" and how that game design was carefully planned and if we don't appreciate the game, we just don't get how the creative process works?

OR...would it lend much more credibility to Gearbox if Mr. Ptchford explained why the pre-release "in-game demo" of A:CM was far superior in visual quality and apparent features to the final released Pc and console versions - it it now known that the pre-release "in-game footage" was designed to run on a very high end PC, knowingly blowing way past the memory budgets for consoles and the target mid-range PC specs. So was this outright deception or simpy a culmination of honest mistakes, miscommunication and bad planning? If Mr. Pitchford came on here, i would afford him respect but gratitude would come from some straight answers, not his defense of a deeply flawed game through his explanation of what "vision" means...

Unfortunately, in the eyes of many consumers right about now, Mr. Moore and Mr. Pitchford both have serious credibility problems that aren't being properly addressed.

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Jose Martin on 18th March 2013 12:36pm

Posted:A year ago

#32

Klaus Preisinger Freelance Writing

1,135 1,171 1.0
Casual vs. Core
Onliners vs. Offliners
Anti-DRM Consumers vs. DRM Apologists
Modders (Large City Mod) vs. Developers (declaring them hackers)

Only the broad mainstream appeal of SimCity could have ever managed to cause such a broad reaction to all these topics. It is a total war on all fronts, even before you start counting desired features, server accessibility and discussions about late game mechanics relying on servers..

At this point it does not even matter which opinion anyone has, or what the vision was. There is clearly demand for both sides of the argument all the time and if EA can find it in themselves to stop trying to convert people to their gospel, we will see better responses, more reasonable and adult responses coming from Maxis. Right now, we are in a situation where people stepped to the counter asking for vanilla and EA is going on and on about strawberry flavor. No amount of eloquence can bridge that gap, no matter how hard PR is trying.

Posted:A year ago

#33

Nick McCrea Gentleman, Pocket Starship

191 301 1.6
The bastardisation of core game design to suit modern business objectives is something that, as consumers, we've increasingly come to expect. And indeed, in some respects, tolerate. Diablo 3's always-on DRM didn't stop 10 million plus buying the game. The shoehorning of multiplayer modes into unsuitable franchises, the genre-twisting of innappropriate IPs into shooters or MMOs, the inevitable march of in-app purchase models, F2P and DLC et al. We're all getting used to these continual attempts at turning discrete products into services. If it's done well, we don't even seem to mind too much.

Yet somehow EA managed to combine the following:

- an inept MMO-style launch, which could only have been caused either by an inability to anticipate demand or a slightly cynical / hard-nosed decision to not purchase sufficient hardware resources to cope with the launch peak.
- a simulation which failed to meet, never mind eclipse, the complexity of the original, therefore ramming home the point that all is to be sacrificed in the name of accessibility. Also, see MS Flight Simulator.
- always on DRM, which people will accept when it is unobtrusive or in service of a greater good. This is palpably neither; though I actually think the always-on DRM is the least damaging aspect of this.
- Some very ham-fisted and ill advised PR attempts, filled with corporate doublespeak and see-through attempts to justify the online-focused nature of the game.

I don't really have a problem with plain old DRM, even of the always-on variety; what I find far more insidious and infuriating is the perversion of core design as a means to justify turning a game into a 'service', particulary when its done as ineffectively as it has been here.

Posted:A year ago

#34

Julian Toseland games podcaster/website

23 6 0.3
I will give my 2 cents here, and probably being at the low end of all you gaming intellects here, lol, I have my views.

I think first "Peter Moore" being here commenting, reflects just how big this has got, with emotion and thoughts from a lot of fields.
From me, a podcaster and a "gamer" at the ground level, there for me anyway is a simple flaw, that I just can't get my head around, and there was warning of problems and backlash when Diablo 3 came out with a similar plan, it to hit major problems from day 1, to which I was a victim myself.
OK it was sorted out in the end, but seeing this complete mess again, i'm stunned that the big powers that be with there, "Vision", how can you miss the fact for a start the actual online infrastructure around the world creates your first flaw in the vision.

For me as a consumer, your missing the point, its "THE" fact its always online is the reason I will not be buying one of my ,most look forward to games of the year...why?, simple I saw the mess with Diablo an "always online" brings, and then the initial reports of how this went, will just keep my cash in my pocket.

And surely however your vision is...the very bottom line is customers and sales, this mentality just seriously effects both from the off, but to then not offer a better explanation of if you may change in the future...just tightens my purse strings further.

For me a mess that could easily have been avoided, or indeed still could be repaired, neither of which seem like its going to happen.....your "vision", is a not working, time to realize it needs changing.

Posted:A year ago

#35

Bonnie Patterson Freelance Narrative Designer

159 432 2.7
Personally, I never wanted an online version of SimCity. Leaderboards and achievements mean zip to me. When I want to play a long-term, in-depth, engrossing sim that takes up great long hours of my time spent contentedly micro-managing, the last thing I want is to have to translate "lolololololol I r maek seuage plant upwind of ur city".

Leaving aside the whole disastrous DRM issue (not because it's not heinous, but because everyone else has covered that very well), a very large part of the reason some franchises are popular is because they're not online, because some people just want to play a game and be left alone. And people are going to be disappointed when more and more of the happily solo franchises they've enjoyed either force them to go bath in the muck or to downgrade to older versions that just don't work so well with their upgraded PCs any more.

Posted:A year ago

#36
Vision... Achievement... No Need to Apologize... then this!

"EA Confirms its "Sorry SimCity Buyers" Make-Up Gifts" (SPONG 17/3/13)

Would seem the executives have had their arrogance toned down a notch over the failure!

Posted:A year ago

#37

Greg Wilcox Creator, Destroy All Fanboys!

2,193 1,170 0.5
Here's a funny for you: I just spoke to an older guy who loves Sim City but HATES the choices he's getting from EA as a make-up gift. What are you to do if you don't WANT a shooter, RPG shooter or horror shooter with an RPG-like weapons crafting system? Free may be free, but if it's not the RIGHT free, it's no good to some folks...

Posted:A year ago

#38
This is a incredibly rushed apology, mixed with a total shift on the companies position on this situation - remember only a few days ago they were not saying an apology was needed! Funny how this attitude changed with the recent news of management changes!

Posted:A year ago

#39

Christopher Thigpen Lead Producer, Kiz Studios

47 92 2.0
If the "VISION" of the company was to alienate fans and give tenured fans of the game the middle finger, you have succeeded!

Congrats on the ineptness of this "vision".

Hi5!

Posted:A year ago

#40

James Verity

132 25 0.2
Julian Toseland - a mess that could easily have been avoided, or indeed still could be repaired, neither of which seem like its going to happen.....your "vision", is a not working, time to realize it needs changing.
alas some people cannot see anything, even when its right in front of their face... next EA will be wondering why piracy is on the increase (of their products), maybe they should have seen that in their "Vision"...

Posted:A year ago

#41

Rick Lopez Illustrator, Graphic Designer

1,269 942 0.7
"DRM hurts more than piracy"

Yeah I completely agree. It makes people who pirate want to pirate even more. And for those honest consumers that spend money buying everything legal it makes them want to start pirating or not support a product entirely.

Most attempts at DRM have been, draconian (harsh) in nature. It only makes things harder or more challenging for pirates and it punishes the honest consumer. the ones that spend money and support products.

And for the person who spends money it angers and frustrates them and that leads to more piracy. Why the fuck would I spend money on something that does not belong to me? that comes with an end user agreement that no one will ever read or even understand. Now a days you cant even take a game to a friends house to enjoy on his console.

You cant lend or share games with people. people who may have never bought the game unless you did that. This is not bad, its just the way people are.I personally would love to take my games to my parents house to play on weekends but I cant unless I take my entire console with game saves and account info needed to play portions of the game. I mean its not that extreme yet, but an example is my Wii games in which everything is attached to the hardware. I cant move or transfer my WiiWare games and saes to play on another console. Lucky the Wii is very small.

Ive already missed out on a few great games Street Fighter x Tekken (Disc locked content), Diablo III (always online DRM), Simcity (always online DRM), Final Fight and Bionic Commando reArmed 2(Always Online DRM) and Finally Deadspace 3(In game purchases). As great as they are Ill pass on games that look for ways to handcuff you or penny the shit outta you.

Rumor has it next gen games will cost 70$... seriously???? And on top of that they are trying to penny the shit out of you after you bought the game through strategically planned DLC or ingame purchases. So each game ends up costing well over $100. Dont mind DLC after a game is released for a while and fans demand more. Or they shoehorn a mediocre online feature and claim the game needs to always be online? At times I feel Im being taken for a moron.

So when you see these companies make all these attempts to handcuff you and to penny the shit outta you, you suddenly feel like you just wanna pirate the game instead. Even if you had the money, the fact that they are playing so dirty means you dont want to support them. And these measures to punish the pirates dont really do anything to stop them... such as with all the shit involving the HDMI interface and blu-ray codec. How much money did they put into that only to be cracked and hacked by pirates a few months later. look at SONY and their CELL processer. Even there PSN was hacked.

I think the best way to fight piracy is to DISCOURAGE it and not be an asshole to the consumer. SONY really set up a nice conference with the PS4 reveal. Listening to gamers and developers on what they needed. They got my good will back and I know alot of people who feel the same. But these attempts at draconian style DRM, sleazy ways to penny the crap out of gamers and huge end user license agreements with alot of legal mumbo jumbo that nobody understands.... only angers and frustrates the honest consumer. Creating more future pirates or less support for a product.

And I have no doubt Sim City is a good game, but with so many good games out there I can skip this one.

While pirates run free, its the guy who pays money that gets all the punishment.

However ill recognize one good thing about EA... EA/Bioware did alot to make amends with Mass Effect 3, about the ending and day one DLC. They pleased fans of the series in many ways since then.

Edited 4 times. Last edit by Rick Lopez on 19th March 2013 2:29pm

Posted:A year ago

#42

Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now