You know how the industry keeps labeling people "entitled" whenever they take any issue whatsoever with what it's doing? Well this form of always on DRM that Sim City is using - you know, the reason why many who bought the game can't play it at this moment - is an example of why people take umbrage.
Everyone understands that companies have the right to, and a need to, protect their property as well as do the best they can to ensure sales. That's normal, expected, and accepted. But when you pay for a game, you ARE "entitled" to be allowed to play said game. Especially when their own people not 24 hours earlier go into interviews and talk about how the servers have been stress tested and are ready for launch. Those interviews aren't just innocent, excusable interactions with fans and media personnel. They're ADVERTISING.
When you advertise that your servers are ready for launch, and people pay for the game partially on the basis of that advertisement, they ARE "entitled" to get what they think they paid for. This is why always-on DRM gets such a bad rap, and why people don't understand and don't accept being called "entitled whiners" by the industry they love and want to support in exchange for gaming experiences they desire.
Meanwhile, pirates manage to crack these forms of DRM in short order. So it doesn't do a lot to deter piracy, and only really causes an inconvenience for paying customers. If it's not going to deter piracy more than an activation key, then why not take a hint from companies like Stardock, and just use activation keys? Stardock's philosophy seems to be that more intrusive forms of DRM don't protect them more than activation keys do, and they *shock and gasp* would rather not INCONVENIENCE THEIR PAYING CUSTOMERS. I know. What a radical concept, right?
That's why they get the kind of loyalty that ensures that many will ride out buggy launches like Elemental, and still be around when they finally fix the game and release something like Elemental: Fallen Enchantress. And they are only one example of companies who treat their customers right and get their loyalty in return. EA: please take note.
For the content that is there the game itself is an absolute blast to play. I've logged just over 15 hours so far on two cities. My first city which is 'single-player' and my second city in a '4 city region' on the Europe East1 server with 3 others. When I chose to do the multi-player it's a very nice mechanic if you want it in the sense that citizens from other cities can work in yours etc etc.
For 'single player' though, it should really only be local, but we all know that. I've avoided the US servers like the plague and haven't had any waiting issues or server dumps or lost cities. I've heard the next best server is Oceanic1.
My only real gripe (other than the blatantly obvious always on DRM), is the city size. I've finally grown my city to the point where I literally have every location built on ... I want a larger tile so my city can sprawl like it did back in SimCity 2000 or 3000 Unlimited.
Other than that, the core game mechanics are absolutely flipping awesome! Such a pity EA has lived up to their motto, 'Ruin Everything!'
The funny thing to me is all the media sites asking why they didn't learn from the launch of Diablo III. I say they did, D3 still made a huge profit regardless of launch issues.. so why would EA waste time and resources on a non issue for them? People keep buying these titles knowing they have always on DRM then are surprised when someone else releases the next always on DRM game, meanwhile the publishers are raking in the profits and see no real issue with launch week woes. Sure people are upset.. but they already paid and they'll get over it once the servers crunch dies down. (as D3 taught us)
Starkly true. As long as enough people will buy it, however much they a small percentage grouse and refuse to buy again, they'll make it. And as long as they can fund a big PR campaign, they'll grab more people who will buy it.
Looks like EA is giving a free game to Simcity players. Taking a bit PR page from Stardock. Not something that I would expect from EA at all. What do you all think, too little too late?
http://www.ea.com/news/a-simcity-update-and-something-for-your-trouble
Haha, read the comments on that link, people are severely pissed off. They want the constant online gone but that will never happen as this is the direction of all new games.
All new games where the consumer will accept being ripped off. Only companies like EA and Ubi could get away with this with established series.
So, do you have to already have bought SimCity to get the free game, or do you just have to buy (and activate) it by March 18th?
Heh, good question. Avoid all the server problems and get a free game? Interesting approach Seleuceia.
For me it depends which game. It's stupid when they give out free stuff but the choices are among old stuff I already own or don't want.
A free game isn't going to entice me into purchasing a game that forces me to be online to play single player and, much more seriously in my opinion, doesn't allow me to save my game locally. That part is even worse to me than the always-online requirement. But I suppose it's a nice gesture for those who already own the game and insist on toughing it out.
If the service worked 100% of the time and I could play seamlessly AS IF I was playing locally, I wouldn't mind that the game featured always online DRM (or always-online functionality of any kind.) But the fact that it doesn't and has been causing people to lose saves left and right (seriously, the number of people talking about losing ten to fifteen hours of progress makes my head hurt) because you can't save the game locally guarantees I will never buy this game personally.
I had an interesting discussion with a former Iron Lore developer (Titan Quest) about his company going under due to piracy and how this might have kept them alive. I am sensitive to that side of things as well. I think the reality is that, while many gamers inadequately show it, we all love and want to support the people who make the games we love. The LAST thing we want to see is for them to lose their livelihood, or for a group of people they love and respect to have to part ways and lose a ton of money and independence because pirates stole their product more than people bought the game. So I can totally understand the need to protect IP and one's business. And I would almost be willing to fully accept always-online DRM for a smaller studio with a game not expected to sell so much that it would impact playability.
But if a game is going to sell millions of units (or downloads) like SimCity in all likelihood already has or will, I feel very strongly as well that the publisher should support the infrastructure for the game sufficiently that no matter many people buy the game, they're all able to enjoy it. This isn't an MMO (no matter how much they want to pass it off as one.) It's a multi-decade staple of PC gaming, and a game that should make people want to buy a PC to play it. Not make them fear PC gaming because things like this seem to happen with virtually every popular game launch nowadays.
Online DRM isn't the problem inherently. (In fact, there's a lot more going on in this game than just DRM that owes to the online nature of the game.) If it worked, I honestly wouldn't care. I'd probably be playing the game right now. The limited city size broken up over regions does bug me, but it looks like fundamentally fun game design and a challenge. And it looks engrossing, as SimCity should be in my opinion. But I cannot and will not give one red cent to a company that forces me to be online to play single player, let alone to save my game. Because this launch proves that if there's ever an issue with their servers, or they ever decide to end support for the game years down the road, I won't be ale to play. Period.
Meanwhile, Cities XL and SimCity 4 continue to run fine on my system. Games I will remember and be able to play for years. It's a real concern to me. What can I say? I don't hate EA or its employees, and I certainly don't hate Maxis. I respect and appreciate their work and what they've done for the industry in terms of growth, no matter how much I disagree with what they're doing. But seeing this become a new industry standard, a "new normal" as it were, is a bitter pill to swallow for someone who's been gaming for nearly three decades. I just can't bring myself to accept it.
Seriously? I haven't seen anyone talking about that that actually experienced it.
In fact I think I've only even heard about it once and that was third party.
I question if that's even a legitimate complaint rather than anti-EA trolling.
From Dan Stapleton (formerly of Gamespy, currently of IGN)'s review in progress:
When I attempted to load my biggest city, here's the choice I was given:
Not much of a choice, is it? Either lose an unspecified amount of progress, or lose all progress.
So unless you consider him an anti-EA troll, I'm going to have to say that the NUMEROUS claims I've read all over the net describing precisely this have at least some merit.
Even failing that, on principle alone, the inability to save locally and have control over your save status is unacceptable to me.
I wasn't commenting on what is or isn't acceptable to you for a reason.
But fair enough. I still haven't seen anyone talking about it, but I'll accept that it is occurring to some.
I know. I'm not trying to argue. I was just clarifying.
This next story from Forbes is a bit more dubious and impossible to fact check (without doing some very underhanded things, anyhow.) So take it with a very large grain of salt. But I thought I'd post it here for those interested.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/03/08/ea-employee-chastizes-company-over-simcity-in-public-letter/
Someone claiming to be an EA employee (whose only verified evidence is knowing that employees received a company-wide email - which was evidently true - for Women's Day, and being able to espouse the company's mottoes and some things about their campus) takes EA to task about the launch and urges them to consider not following the same path with future projects.
On that note, for anyone who cares, new servers are up worldwide.
Just lost 3 hours of game play ... *sigh* so much for the Europe East server being stable ... the game play is so much fun it's just makes me dislike EA that much more for ruining this.
EPIC FAIL
In the interest of trying to be as objective and fair as possible, I'd like to defuse some of the EA hate I've been seeing. Don't get me wrong, I disagree with plenty they do too. (Origin, emphasis on micro-transactions moving forward, although they claim to have backed off on that for now... we'll see.) But there seems to be a perception, both on the part of gamers and journalists, that EA forced these changes onto Sim City. I offer the following as evidence that this may not be the case:
1) A tweet from today by Maxis General Manager Lucy Bradshaw https://twitter.com/simcity/status/310496083841261569 "Hey, this is on Maxis. EA does not force design upon us. We own it, we are working 24/7 to fix it, and we are making progress."
2) Back in December, when many gamers were expressing serious concerns that something exactly like how this launch has gone could happen, the Vice President of Maxis stated that they designed the game to be always-online from the ground up and why: http://www.gamespot.com/news/maxis-simcitys-always-on-drm-for-gamers-benefit-6401896
So unless they're covering EA's or their own asses by taking responsibility for these decisions, it looks like this may have been Maxis' call.
I have no interest in bashing EA (or Maxis for that matter) to pieces for these issues. And I don't "hate" either company. I encourage others who do to let go of that. Criticize, complain, and advocate a move away from these models if you're inclined to. Hell, even sign petitions if you think it'll do any good. But hatred and rage aren't going to do you any good in my opinion. Remaining civil and courteous seems to result in more probability of being heard in my experience. (And makes you feel better too.)
At the end of the day, all we all really want are games we love to play in a format that's reliable and what we consider fair. Hating people over it isn't going to accomplish that. But, that said, when a launch this bad happens and makes it so glaringly obvious that this model can really hurt paying customers, I do feel inclined to speak up. Particularly as much of the industry seems to want to move in this direction. Something I sincerely hope never becomes the industry standard.
After having some time to actually play the game, I have to say, I'm not very impressed. The cities are just too small and the economy is just too easy. It's not bad, but it's just not that great either.
First the vid, then I will comment afterward...
All right, I admit this is a lot of fun but, again, being on-line just to play a single player game. Even the guy who posted the vid you can here his displeasure on logging on. It looks great and I can see myself losing track of time. (Damn, I got to go to work again...?)
But even how fun it looks, the monsters wrecking your town, the constant on-line thing I don't get. If the older ones are just as fun without the headaches that this one is causing. Sold....
It's easy until it isn't. I've run into several situations where things devolved quickly, and when you get into the specializations they tend to cost money to run without guaranteed benefits (if there are no problems with the water or power or traffic they'll probably be fine, but...there will always be problems with those.)
As to the online bit, once the initial server load and patches calm down people will be far more accepting of the 'always connected' premise.
Honestly I prefer playing with other people in the region. It's not always social unless you know them, and then it is. And you can work together on building Great Works or education or any number of other things.
I wish more of my friends had their copies already. They keep telling me they're going to buy it. Heh.
I have to say, regardless of these DRM issues, seeing that nice graphics and listening to that dreamy music..., lets just say it really makes me to want to play the game. Definitely some good work on the presentation there.
But WTF is that shit with the size of the cities? Apparently its limited to 2x2 km, now my hometown of mighty 5000 inhabitants is surely bigger than that! I realize the scale was never going to be real-like, i remember reading somewhere that entire New York City is about 1200 km2, obviously that was not going to happen...but 4 km2? Seriously?
I have never seen a game get this many complaints..!!!!
.
Nothing like having to wait on on an server to play a good damm single player game....
And then you are lucky if you dont loose progress after the reconnect.
And if that is the City size... you know... I had larger cities on SNES.
Ohh.... and rest assured that the servers will go down in a few years.... say goodbye to your money, say goodbye to your progress.....
BUT.... of course you may buy the next version... just € 60 for you....
FOOLS!
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
