42 réponses à ce sujet

[Kzak]

EA servers for authentication != ME3 multiplayer functions. They are separate.

[Massa FX]

Isn't it wayyyy to early to fret about this?

IMO, ME3 MP servers will shutdown overtime as players transition to ME4 MP. Isn't that what usually happens?

[tangalin]

Ninja Stan wrote...



e) "we paid good money no right to **** us and not let us play what we paid for" is not a great argument, as the game is playable at the time you bought it and, presumably, for years afterward. There is never a lifetime guarantee when it comes to software or media. Notice that no one is complaining that they can no longer play their Apple II version of Choplifter or Karateka or any of the games stored on 5 1/4" floppy disks. And where are the laserdisc enthusiasts (or, better yet, HD-DVD or Minidisc enthusiasts) demanding their money back from?

Yeah, you want some guarantee that your beloved games will still work in the future, if and when you might decide to play them again, but if your future game-playing habits can't yet be defined, you can't really expect any company to satisfy them. Annoyance or anger at a company that won't cater to your future whims is a little silly, because at this point, you can still play the games you paid for.

The difference is, no one was able to remotely turn off their ability to use what they paid for. If you still have the platform to use those things, you still can. Not so with big publishers anti-consumer practices.

[Morlanwen]

Ninja Stan wrote...
...
e) "we paid good money no right to **** us and not let us play what we paid for" is not a great argument, as the game is playable at the time you bought it and, presumably, for years afterward. There is never a lifetime guarantee when it comes to software or media. Notice that no one is complaining that they can no longer play their Apple II version of Choplifter or Karateka or any of the games stored on 5 1/4" floppy disks. And where are the laserdisc enthusiasts (or, better yet, HD-DVD or Minidisc enthusiasts) demanding their money back from?

Yeah, you want some guarantee that your beloved games will still work in the future, if and when you might decide to play them again, but if your future game-playing habits can't yet be defined, you can't really expect any company to satisfy them. Annoyance or anger at a company that won't cater to your future whims is a little silly, because at this point, you can still play the games you paid for.

I still have games on floppy disks, and stil have a floppy driver. I can play Laura Bow (this game was released in 1989..)
But if I want to play ME3 in the middle of nowhere without internet connection, I can't ... If I want to buy ahes DLC,  or Omega DLC,  I have to launch origin .. great :/
Authorisation for the first time you use a DLC ... why not, but EVERYTIME , really ???


--- forgive my bad english ---

[Sovereign330]

Ninja Stan wrote...

a) EA likely has a plan to sunset any game that requires online authorization or play. It seems likely that they would simply remove the need for online authorization.

servers likely won't sunset for many years, in which case you'll have plenty of time to play your games

c) the number of people who want to play a game that requires online authorization whose servers have already been shut down are woefully small

d) just as new technology allows current gamers to play old games, there will likely be services or products that will allow play of current games in the future. See GOG.com and other services for ways gamers can currently play older games.

e) "we paid good money no right to **** us and not let us play what we paid for" is not a great argument, as the game is playable at the time you bought it and, presumably, for years afterward. There is never a lifetime guarantee when it comes to software or media. Notice that no one is complaining that they can no longer play their Apple II version of Choplifter or Karateka or any of the games stored on 5 1/4" floppy disks. And where are the laserdisc enthusiasts (or, better yet, HD-DVD or Minidisc enthusiasts) demanding their money back from?

Yeah, you want some guarantee that your beloved games will still work in the future, if and when you might decide to play them again, but if your future game-playing habits can't yet be defined, you can't really expect any company to satisfy them. Annoyance or anger at a company that won't cater to your future whims is a little silly, because at this point, you can still play the games you paid for.

Valid points. And thanks for answering. But I dont like the feeling that there is a possibility I may not be able to enjoy it to the fullest in the future. I love Mass Effect and will likely be playing every now and again down the road. Hence my concern. As for point e..yes a bit vulgar i apologize. However,if I really enjoyed my Apple 2 version of Choplifter...Id still want to play it today in its exact form. If I paid to have the game and I paid to have the DLC, I should be able to have access to all that content whenever I desire since I Paid for it. Wouldnt want to wake up one day and go.."oh snap...I can't play it anymore. My game saves are corrupt. DLC isn't recognized etc."   I will always want to play Mass Effect because for me its just that good. So for that, I really hope your first few points are true because I really would love to play these games for as long as possible.

[Bravenu3]

Sovereign330 wrote... Apparently, when the Mass Effect 3 servers EVENTUALLY go offline, the DLC will become inaccessible due to the fact that there is no server to authorize your Online Pass. Is this true? It sounds.....wrong.

Welcome to DRM world. Before EA or BW takes that step, they can either release a patch to lift DRM, [inappropriate comment removed.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 07 novembre 2012 - 07:03 .

[Ninja Stan]

Y'all are correct that my comparison to old media formats isn't the best. What about subscribing to MMOs that ultimately fail, then? In those cases, not only did you pay for the game, you are also paying a monthly subscription fee for access. My point of never having a guarantee that the product will still work in a hypothetical future still stands, I think.

[Sovereign330]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Y'all are correct that my comparison to old media formats isn't the best. What about subscribing to MMOs that ultimately fail, then? In those cases, not only did you pay for the game, you are also paying a monthly subscription fee for access. My point of never having a guarantee that the product will still work in a hypothetical future still stands, I think.

And Im saying Mass Effect is too awesome to just write it off like that. Oh sorry. you wanna play Omega 5 years later? Too bad. As I said, I do not like that at all. I support you guys and I think we should be allowed to keep what we paid for in exchange for supporting you.

[Agorme]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Y'all are correct that my comparison to old media formats isn't the best. What about subscribing to MMOs that ultimately fail, then? In those cases, not only did you pay for the game, you are also paying a monthly subscription fee for access. My point of never having a guarantee that the product will still work in a hypothetical future still stands, I think.

MMO's can't relate to single players in that comparison in my opinion.  Its a whole other model of games , wich depends on a certain number of subscribers to keep it running.
Single players dont have to depend on such things , since kinda obvious .... they are not multiplayer.
Its only the later years since DRM  is added to that equation.

[Ninja Stan]

Sovereign330 wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Y'all are correct that my comparison to old media formats isn't the best. What about subscribing to MMOs that ultimately fail, then? In those cases, not only did you pay for the game, you are also paying a monthly subscription fee for access. My point of never having a guarantee that the product will still work in a hypothetical future still stands, I think.

And Im saying Mass Effect is too awesome to just write it off like that. Oh sorry. you wanna play Omega 5 years later? Too bad. As I said, I do not like that at all. I support you guys and I think we should be allowed to keep what we paid for in exchange for supporting you.

I'm going to keep saying it: I am not currently a BioWare employee.

Also, you aren't playing Omega 5 years later. It hasn't even come out yet. Nor has anyone said anything about shutting down the aurthentication servers in five years. Nor is anyone taking any of your game permissions away. You're freaking out about a potential future event that may or may not happen. I would worry more about that accident you may or may not have when you're 74 years old that breaks your game disc. Or the zombie apocalypse that may or may not happen that shuts down the power plants.

[Ninja Stan]

Agorme wrote...

MMO's can't relate to single players in that comparison in my opinion.  Its a whole other model of games , wich depends on a certain number of subscribers to keep it running.
Single players dont have to depend on such things , since kinda obvious .... they are not multiplayer.
Its only the later years since DRM  is added to that equation.

The concern was that some day in the future, the EA authentication servers would shut down, rendering current games unplayable. When an MMO fails, its servers shut down, rendering current games unplayable. I'm not seeing a difference in the comparison, since the core concern and effect is the same in both cases.

[Sovereign330]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Sovereign330 wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Y'all are correct that my comparison to old media formats isn't the best. What about subscribing to MMOs that ultimately fail, then? In those cases, not only did you pay for the game, you are also paying a monthly subscription fee for access. My point of never having a guarantee that the product will still work in a hypothetical future still stands, I think.

And Im saying Mass Effect is too awesome to just write it off like that. Oh sorry. you wanna play Omega 5 years later? Too bad. As I said, I do not like that at all. I support you guys and I think we should be allowed to keep what we paid for in exchange for supporting you.

I'm going to keep saying it: I am not currently a BioWare employee.

Also, you aren't playing Omega 5 years later. It hasn't even come out yet. Nor has anyone said anything about shutting down the aurthentication servers in five years. Nor is anyone taking any of your game permissions away. You're freaking out about a potential future event that may or may not happen. I would worry more about that accident you may or may not have when you're 74 years old that breaks your game disc. Or the zombie apocalypse that may or may not happen that shuts down the power plants.

I was using Omega as an example because 5 years down it will be out. Anyway, yea...youre right..Im probably just being anxious like always. Thanks.

[FlamingBoy]

sounds like standard EA practice

and they wonder why people do not like them

[Sovereign330]

Would be nice to hear "there will be a patch dont worry"

[Morlanwen]

But ME is not a MMO right? When I bought it, it was for SP.
When I buy a MMO, I know that maybe, one day, servers will be shut down. But when I buy a single player game, I'd like to be able to play it whenever I want, even if servers for MP are down. If I buy DLC (SP DLC, not MP) I want them to be available even if I can't log on Origin.
I bought several dlc for Dragon age and ME2, and I still can play them without being logged. Sure I had to log one time to enable them, but only ONE time.

--- sorry for bad english ---

[Mathias]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Agorme wrote...

MMO's can't relate to single players in that comparison in my opinion.  Its a whole other model of games , wich depends on a certain number of subscribers to keep it running.
Single players dont have to depend on such things , since kinda obvious .... they are not multiplayer.
Its only the later years since DRM  is added to that equation.

The concern was that some day in the future, the EA authentication servers would shut down, rendering current games unplayable. When an MMO fails, its servers shut down, rendering current games unplayable. I'm not seeing a difference in the comparison, since the core concern and effect is the same in both cases.

What about Origin? If eventually that shutsdown, i better be able to still play my games.

This does concern me because Mass Effect is my favorite trilogy, and i don't want to lose it 5 years down the line just because EA shuts down the servers. This is why i hate hate HATE the online requirement BS.

[Anchor654]

 Not sure if this has been mentioned before or if it will be relevant if/when the servers go down, but I've been able to play the single player DLC / campaign with my Internet down.

Edit: On the Xbox, not sure of origin users now. I see your concerns.

Modifié par Anchor654, 08 novembre 2012 - 02:21 .

[Agorme]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Agorme wrote...

MMO's can't relate to single players in that comparison in my opinion.  Its a whole other model of games , wich depends on a certain number of subscribers to keep it running.
Single players dont have to depend on such things , since kinda obvious .... they are not multiplayer.
Its only the later years since DRM  is added to that equation.

The concern was that some day in the future, the EA authentication servers would shut down, rendering current games unplayable. When an MMO fails, its servers shut down, rendering current games unplayable. I'm not seeing a difference in the comparison, since the core concern and effect is the same in both cases.

I get what you say. Comparing two types of games and the end result may be similar.
But like i said a MMO depends on subscribers and the server. A single player doesnt, only its DRM does.
[inappropriate comment removed]
The effect may be the same when an MMO fails and it has been so in the past. But it was never so with Single players.

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 09 novembre 2012 - 12:42 .