203 réponses à ce sujet

[esper]

andy69156915 wrote...

I would say they DO have an obligation. Sim City has shown that. Do they HAVE to stick to that obligation? No. Is it an EXTREMELY bad idea not to stick to it? Yes. Otherwise, your game bombs horribly.

NO THEY DO NOT.

They are making games. They can make the games they want. What Sim City hopefully has shown them is that there is no huge market for always online games - espically amongst sim's and rpgs, but that is it.

No where does any firm of any kind have an obligation to stick to a single market nor stick to the market we like. That a game bombs have nothing to do with obligations or ethics, it simply has to do with reading the market wrong or not reaching your audience, it has nothing to do with ethic or obligations, nor does it justify the buyers breaking the law.

[andy6915]

Yes, they can make the games they want... And have their game bomb if you do something asstastically stupid like put in always-online-DRM. AGAIN: Sim City proves it.

Put it this way. I have no true obligation to not rob a store. It's my free choice as a sapient being to do so. However, it's society's free choice to imprison me for it. I can do whatever I want, just like game publishers. And what I choose to do can bite me in the ass for it, just like game publishers.

[esper]

andy69156915 wrote...

Yes, they can make the games they want... And have their game bomb if you do something asstastically stupid like put in always-online-DRM. AGAIN: Sim City proves it.

Put it this way. I have no true obligation to not rob a store. It's my free choice as a sapient being to do so. However, it's society's free choice to imprison me for it. I can do whatever I want, just like game publishers. And what I choose to do can bite me in the ass for it, just like game publishers.

I do not deny that.
It is your choice to do, just as the consequence will be yours.

[andy6915]

Did you see my edit last page? You never responded to it. It was my last post of page 3, the "obligation" post.

[esper]

andy69156915 wrote...

Did you see my edit last page? You never responded to it. It was my last post of page 3, the "obligation" post.

I saw it and had actually wrote a large answer to it, but then deleted it again, because I did not want to bother because I had allready made my point, but since you asked specifically I will give you the short answer.

The publisher is part of it too, in fact without the publisher the game would not be the same game for better or for worse and thus they are entitled their money. We can agree that their meddling might suck (and this is not just for video games) but no matter as long as bioware is part of the publisher, the publisher has a right to their money.

Basically if you buy a game with online requirement it will always be up to you to have the internent connection.

The only thing you can do to work against this is to not buy the game and complain here and other places and tell exactly why you did not want to buy the game.

It is sad to not be able to play a game you want to play, but the publisher is under no obligation to make the game for you. Personally I am hoping that there isn't a market amongst rpg fans for always online and that EA have realized that.

[andy6915]

Right. I'll leave it there then. The debate seems over at this point. We both made a our points in a level-headed fashion, and I don't think of you as an idiot afterward (which, trust me, not thinking of someone I debated as an idiot afterward is rare). Still, the way I see it: If I'm already not buying the game because I can't play it, then my pirating doesn't deny them a sale because they weren't going to get a purchase from me anyway.

AGAIN though, I am not actually supporting pirates. If you like the game and can actually play it, do the respectable thing and BUY THE GAME.

Modifié par andy69156915, 02 avril 2013 - 03:41 .

[OdanUrr]

SimCity.

[esper]

andy69156915 wrote...

Right. I'll leave it there then. The debate seems over at this point. We both made a our points in a level-headed fashion, and I don't think of you as an idiot afterward (which, trust me, not thinking of someone I debated as an idiot afterward is rare). Still, the way I see it: If I'm already not buying the game because I can't play it, then my pirating doesn't deny them a sale because they weren't going to get a purchase from me anyway.

AGAIN though, I am not actually supporting pirates. If you like the game and can actually play it, do the respectable thing and BUY THE GAME.

Well, thanks for the compliment and I do agree that we seems to have reached the point where further arguments would just be repeating the same lines again and again.

[Dominari]

FieryDove wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Guy who said such gem of wisdom got the boot for making EA lose money for 3 years in a row.

Frank Gibeau was fired? I had not heard that.

http://www.pcgamer.c...yer-experience/

Not fired.  As of 6 days ago he was claiming that SimCity was never given an online requirement, it just happened organically.
http://www.gamesindu...ad-end-strategy

Yeah, no project goes through without an online component but online component's are not a requirement .... 
It's not helping with that whole trust thing.

[Wulfram]

Dominari wrote...

Not fired.  As of 6 days ago he was claiming that SimCity was never given an online requirement, it just happened organically.
http://www.gamesindu...ad-end-strategy

Yeah, no project goes through without an online component but online component's are not a requirement .... 
It's not helping with that whole trust thing.

What he's saying is that the always online wasn't there for DRM.

I don't find that unbelievable.  I reckon it was there for microtransactions

[Fast Jimmy]

Wulfram wrote...

Dominari wrote...

Not fired.  As of 6 days ago he was claiming that SimCity was never given an online requirement, it just happened organically.
http://www.gamesindu...ad-end-strategy

Yeah, no project goes through without an online component but online component's are not a requirement .... 
It's not helping with that whole trust thing.

What he's saying is that the always online wasn't there for DRM.

I don't find that unbelievable.  I reckon it was there for microtransactions

I stick by my premise that the new SimCity game would have been great if it had been a mobile game (smaller city sizes, dependence on neighbors, always online, etc.). Since it was created, marketted and sold as a AAA PC title in the vein of its previous last games, but now with a "new online feature," it was received poorly. People expected the same SimCity with a slightly new feature, instead they had a vastly different game with a poorly implemented always online requirement. 

There's some lessons to be learned there. Always online works well only with platforms that are, by their very nature, always online. Also, if you are going to be storing everything in online servers, maybe it is better to have the base game be much less resource intensive, otherwise your servers may collapse under the weight of the higher game requirements. And lastly, if you are going to put out a game that is quite different in terms of gameplay, execution and requirements, it is probably best to just put out a new IP and say "From the makers of SimCity" rather than try and sell something new under an old name, and then act shocked when people expect the old thing instead of the new.

[sirus1988]

Your idea would be preaty cool and it would make people more interested in the game longer. But only if it's an online component, meaning go online, get the operation done and that would be it. I do not want to have my game be online all the time. If it did this, I won't buy it because I cannot be online all the time..

[Get Magna Carter]

dlc expansions = online component

[Rawgrim]

Get Magna Carter wrote...

dlc expansions = online component

That can be downloaded, installed, and played offline.

[Bekkael]

I find this and all the rumors about the next-gen xbox to be rather depressing.

What ever happened to respecting unsociable and reclusive preferences? When I want to play a game alone, I would like to be utterly alone, without EA or Microsoft whispering in my ear.

Really missing my N64 and those lovely cartridges you had to blow on to get them to work. The latest, greatest technology is entirely overrated.

[Bekkael]

J. Reezy wrote...

Bekkael wrote...

I find this and all the rumors about the next-gen xbox to be rather depressing.

What ever happened to respecting unsociable and reclusive preferences? When I want to play a game alone, I would like to be utterly alone, without EA or Microsoft whispering in my ear.

Really missing my N64 and those lovely cartridges you had to blow on to get them to work. The latest, greatest technology is entirely overrated.

Reclusive and unsociable types FTW!

Exactly.

[Killer3000ad]

The only thing SimCity stores online is the save games. EA Maxis's claims that a lot of the computations are handled in the cloud have been proven DEAD LIES! People were able to play offline for 20 minutes and people who monitored traffic during gameplay noticed very little traffic. The only thing the game does every 20 minutes is make sure you are connected to the server. Later someone made a mod that lets you play offline but you need reconnect to save though. Of course Maxis called it a hack and deleted any posts about it on their forums.

Modifié par Killer3000ad, 06 avril 2013 - 11:10 .

[Maverick827]

MarchWaltz wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

How's about the good people at EA allow Bioware to support modding?

That would require more work than bioware wants to do.

Come on now, they are not bethesda. Cash cash cash is the name of the game now.

Wait, Bathesda does a lot of work?  Bare bones Bathesda games have a 4 hour campaign, 5 different voice actors for hundreds of NPCs, shallow character design, shallow plot lines, and an inordinate amount of bugs.  I say this with as much love as possible, believe it or not.  Bathesda doesn't do more work, they do different work.

Modifié par Maverick827, 06 avril 2013 - 11:08 .

[Allan Schumacher]

A mod might dislike me saying this, but I am in no way actually supporting piracy when I say this:

I do dislike you saying this, because despite your refutations you are supporting piracy, even if it's as a last resort.

If you don't like the features and the mechanism, the strongest way to show your disapproval is not to not buy it, but to not play it altogether.

When you pirate a game, you're providing another data point that someone somewhere can use to justify DRM. I'm not a fan of DRM, but someone somewhere looks at it, makes a financial case for it, and presumably is able to financially justify its existence (I have no idea who this person is).

Here's some food for thought: If piracy didn't exist, DRM would undeniably be a 100% waste of money. The corporate fat cats that are always in someone's crosshairs couldn't possibly justify it.

However, since its effect is rather nebulous, all I can leave with is this vagueish notion that "it's probably not very helpful." Though I suppose if someone were to come around with some definitive numbers and showed them to me, I might be inclined to think otherwise. Like you and everyone else on this forum, I am left with only a hunch.


As for whether or not one should "be denied from playing an awesome game." I infinitely respect someone that can go "I really want to play this game, but it has aspects of it that I cannot support, so I won't." That voice resonates strongly with me. Circumventing and supporting piracy (and all the negatives that can come with it) because you simply could not go on without playing a video game you think is awesome is not a position I can respect.

I draw a line in the sand for how much a feel a game is worth to me. If a game ever comes across as having aspects of it that I cannot justify ANY price, I will never play that game. I'm not a big fan always online requirements. I personally think SimCity should have probably just marketed itself as being a multiplayer online experience. However, given that the game's always online aspect was something even I (who hardly followed the game during development) knew about, I do find myself surprised.

I don't find always online to be innately evil (nor do I hope those games bomb. Note to forum goes, the people most likely to be affected by the game bombing is someone like me. If the game isn't for you, fine, but if others are okay with it that's their prerogative). The only games I have purchased that have mandatory online components (that I wasn't buying to explicitly use, like Diablo III), are games that I purchase on extreme discounts (or in the case of SimCity, able to get for no cost to myself). This is because I consider always online for a game that has no online component I'm interested in to have a negative value. So I picked up Silent Hunter V for dirt cheap ($5 ultimately waste of money, but alas) and Splinter Cell Conviction for cheap too ($10 but ultimately worth the money for the experience I got, and I did enjoy the Co-op component a lot).

I encourage others to do the same sort of things.


IMO, if something is a deal breaker for you, I think you do the gaming industry a greater service by not playing the game. It prevents anyone from taking the data of pirated games and drawing conclusions that are not correct. No one can look at an always online game that had crap sales and zero pirate downloads and make any excuses that piracy affected it.

[Wulfram]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Here's some food for thought: If piracy didn't exist, DRM would undeniably be a 100% waste of money. The corporate fat cats that are always in someone's crosshairs couldn't possibly justify it.

Not if it also stops legitimate reselling.

[Maria Caliban]

After playing ME 3 MP for about a year, I'd say my biggest problem with games that always require an internet connection is that EA's servers aren't always available.

The average consumer only cares about DRM when it keeps them from playing the game. Sure, forums will complain about rootkits, but on-disk DRM was only a 'problem' when it prevented people from playing their games or trashed their systems. Sure, forums will complain about always-on internet connections, but tons of people still bought the Assassin's Creed games and the latest SimCity.

You can use whatever DRM you desire as long as you make the experience painless to the end-user. But publishers aren't doing that.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 06 avril 2013 - 11:29 .

[Bekkael]

The problem I have with the poster who was clearly advocating piracy (apart from downplaying breaking the law to make it seem okay...not acceptable, ever) is the overwhelming entitlement to his/her argument.

Is any person entitled to play a game because "it is awesome"? Absolutely not. A CONSUMER who purchases a product is entitled to get the product they pay for and nothing else. The onus is on the consumer to research the product before purchase. If you purchase a pair of white shoes when you wanted black, without first checking the label to be sure they were black shoes then you have no one to blame except yourself.

Do the research, then decide if it is something you feel good about spending your money on. If it isn't, then pass on it. But don't penalize the men and women who worked hard on that product by stealing from them, and then try to sugarcoat your reasons for theft. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself, but you are injuring others through your selfish actions.

Modifié par Bekkael, 06 avril 2013 - 11:43 .