203 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

billy the squid wrote...

The sales deals, the ability to run things in offline mode, if I wan't as well as general online stability and now the recent addition to trade licenses digitally on steam.

Has this actually happened yet?  I remember hearing some news from Germany but don't know the details, nor how widespread it is.

The issues with Diablo 3 and SimCity is that it's not a form of DRM, perhaps in a cynical roundabout way it is, because it's designed to always be online. Diablo 3 got that sorted out, it's impossible to pirate it, to my knowledge. SimCity, the higher ups in the company said that the online requirement was necessary, like Diablo 3, except it was found out not to be, that playing it offline is possible.

I know the "we offload calculations" was overstated (and not handled super well), although aren't there still issues?  I have briefly played the game, and I am not sure if the games could be saved, nor if the full effects of the region and whatnot are proprerly taken into account (i.e. at best it's static, and I don't think you could build the great works).

There is a difference between the two. But, I think Diablo3 and Sim City would have been recieved  a lot better had the servers been up to stuff. Perhaps you can answer this though, if games like Diablo 3 are becoming the accepted norm, as part of the game is run on the company side, if I understand it correctly, is it actually feasable to do that with multiple games, each with seperate servers.

It's possible to do it without even needing separate servers (and has been for some time.  Our counterstrike clan rented out several "servers" on an OC3 line through a local television station.  We had 4 unique game servers, but they were all running on the same machine in 2000).

Google is able to seamlessly update their server capacity and storage space on the fly without having to take the their systems offline, just by plugging more hardware into the nexus.

With streaming game services, I could see consoles having longer lifespans as the server cores themselves could do all the hardware upgrading for higher performance games (though we're some ways away from that, IMO).

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 07 avril 2013 - 06:10 .

[Fredward]

Right. Well. If multiplayer is optional, then fine. Stuff as many features into it as you want. I don't care. The problem crops up when games that are supposed, that were marketed, as a singleplayer experience suddenly requires a constant internet connection. It is utter, utter BS. I read an article from someone in Australia complaining about Simcity's* always online requirement bemoaning the fact that only 75% of the country has access to the internet. It was tragic, really, I teared up. Over here only 11% of the population has access to the internet. The average speed is 100kbps. Speaking for myself, my internet goes down about twice a day. It is not even FEASIBLE to play a game that requires you to be constantly online. This attitude that everyone should just have access to the internet and that if you don't that's your choice (I'm looking at you Adam Orth) and nothing more than a preference makes me want to projectile vomit. It shows a mind numbing level of privelige.

Furthermore the idea that any kind of permanently online requirement is a feasible way to combat piracy is retarded. Depressing as it is, you can't combat piracy. You are literally dealing with MILLIONS of programmers with nothing better to do than pick apart the work of at MOST a couple of hundred. It's a joke. There are cracked versions of WoW for crying out loud! With entire pirate SERVERS! Google Simcity 2013 and see if you can't find a cracked version on the first page.

So yeah. If any of Bioware's games suddenly require a constant internet connection I will spout vitriol on a level that has yet to be witnessed on this plane of existence. It would be BEYOND ironic for the developer who has been preaching equality and inclusion to label it first-world only.

* - actually it was about the new Xbox's supposedly permanent internet connection requirement. My bad.

Modifié par Foopydoopydoo, 07 avril 2013 - 09:01 .

[bEVEsthda]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Take note that Steam is a form of DRM.

And I support DRM. DRM, as a concept, is good!
And I support Steam. Steam is good. It offers all kinds of well managed and positive services to paying customers. And I've found it more a convenience than inconvenience.
- And, very important, I trust Steam.
 
Let the pirates deal with their crippled and partially dysfunctional games, whatever. They are thieves and can go to hell, as far as I'm concerned.
I want good games to earn their developer money, so they get their just awards and can continue their business.
This is only right and fair.

As for EA and Origin, it's a very long way uphill to get their act together. And despite that I've seen this discussed for years, I fail to see that EA has taken one single step
A DRM that seriously inconvenience a paying customer, and spits an affronting "it's not your game, and you'll only be able to play it for as long as we feel it makes business sense", spits it straight into the face, followed by a *friendly* "if you don't like it, take your business elsewhere", otoh, is an entirely different thing.

For some extremely strange reason, seemingly saturated into most things EA do, EA seem mainly interested in doing things in the latter spirit. To this day, I utterly fail to understand how any group of decision makers can come to the conclusion that Spore's (original) DRM scheme was acceptable? - It defies reason! What the f**k is wrong with the mental process here? How can ANYBODY fail to see that's it's going to be a PR disaster?

(And how can anybody fail to see that ME3's ending will be a PR disaster? Though it's not part of our discussion here, only another of many examples of how something is seriously wrong with EA culture)

And Sim City. How could EA possibly be unaware of yet another pending PR disaster? - It defies logic! Everybody warned them and then there was the example of Diablo 3 to watch as well. Nobody is that stupid! Nobody! So how the f**K does EA decision-making manage to be, again and again?

(Now in the end, it wasn't the major reason Spore failed, after the initial sales. It was because the gameplay had been corrupted, by marketing, to to fit a different (imaginary) audience. Just like DA2. ...And just like Sim City too, maybe. The culture of the game is certainly changed though. It doesn't build on Sim City 4, like I feel a successor should. Rather, the only thing new it offers, will eventually be the ability to pay extra for putting back removed content. What does this say, about the mental process, and company culture,  when this is how a publisher/developer treats one of the most successful franchises ever, after a decade of silence? But again, it's a different issue. But the company culture and mindset seem very related in these two issues).

DRM?   - Bring it on! I say.
But do it the right way. Btw, have you considered going back to Steam?
EA's big problem here is that nobody trusts EA. And nobody trusts EA to get anything right, in any of the first three attempts, even if they're honest attempt. Which again, there will be a lot of doubt about.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 07 avril 2013 - 10:24 .

[LilyasAvalon]

I've no quam with an internet connection the first time you load up the game, I understand why companies worry about piracy, but constant internet connection? **** please, I'd never be able to play DA3 then! My connection stability is bloody crap.

[Get Magna Carter]

Rawgrim wrote...

Get Magna Carter wrote...

dlc expansions = online component

That can be downloaded, installed, and played offline.

yes

It's my understanding that the requirement was to discourage console owners trading in their copies.
Whether they are holding onto them while playing multi-player or holding onto them while waiting for the next dlc expansion does not matter - either way it fulfiulls EA's online requirement.

(Of course I'm holding onto mine because I'm a hoarder and may wish to replay at some point)

[Sakatox]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
*SNIP*
It's possible to do it without even needing separate servers (and has been for some time.  Our counterstrike clan rented out several "servers" on an OC3 line through a local television station.  We had 4 unique game servers, but they were all running on the same machine in 2000).

Google is able to seamlessly update their server capacity and storage space on the fly without having to take the their systems offline, just by plugging more hardware into the nexus.

With streaming game services, I could see consoles having longer lifespans as the server cores themselves could do all the hardware upgrading for higher performance games (though we're some ways away from that, IMO).

It's awfully funny how you make optimistic statements about drm-infested, internet-connection restricted cloud computing for gaming.

The solution to the eternal hardware problem would be to make hardware more cheap and not so easily thrown out due to advancement. Since that's not possible, and most people wouldn't stand (as they are not standing, see new SimCity) for an always online connection, the next best thing is to upgrade occasionally.

The problem isn't even about the upgrading process, as it's not as costly as one might think, even in the terms of PC gaming. Sure, you need a brain to make a comparative list of the best for the lowest cost, but that's like with everything else. Consoles offer none of that, just a machine that's filled to the brim with proprietary stuff, drm, and company control - not to mention consoles being stripped down, barebones proprietary software using PCs, even if some parts are uniquely made(ps3's cores for example.)

The whole problem boils down to money: If you have it, you can buy things. IF you have less, you buy more carefully - the latter businesses like EA don't like. "The happy merchant" who likes you for buying SimCity overpriced, with always online and you lubing up for more fun later on when connections go bad, intel cpus and nvidia cards would be an example.

In one of your previous posts, you mentioned that Steam is DRM. So is Origin, and it's much more invasive, privacy destroying. There's a reason i do not use it, because i do not like my privacy being sold out to World-wide(mostly american) moneylords(same fashion as african warlords, think about it).

Also also about games needing more processing power: If money and thought went into optimizing, games would run on coffee machines(slight exaggeration on my part), see WoW for example. Yes, it's outdated now, but it runs on almost everything. So it needs more money invested to be performing more fine? Not my problem, if said developer and publisher(why can't developers release it for themselves during this day and age i won't ever understand.) wants a legitimate buy, make it worth my while. Not just with flashy michael bay explosions or silly GRAFIX, but a compelling storyline, great performance and whatever else i fancy. I'm the one paying, it should be on my terms.
Don't say optimizing is hard for the large market of PC components, it is not. Skyrim's performance can be easily upped by atleast 20% if you use the community released optimizations.

(A great example of how to use both the PC and console market would be the Witcher 2.)


Back to the main topic at hand(Always-online): Consoles started to move out in that direction and the uproar is humongous, people even got fired because of their statements. Not everyone can afford a stable perfect internet connection, nor does everyone have the proper infrastructure to do it. That's not how it should work, as this is only to introduce more control for the publishers and devs - "the game police" so to speak. The whole thing about sharing stuff on Twitter, etc. is just bollocks - if i want to, i'll sign into it with a browser and make a pretty entry about it myself. Nor would i ever give my personal data, like passwords or bank accounts to any company that does this to me.

If i buy a game, i expect it to be playable in the most dire situations as well, no internet, no anything. Just electricity and my computer/console.

I like my singleplayer games single for a reason. Sure, let there be an OPTION(on/off) for an online component to upload player statistics but ONLY IF THE PLAYER WANTS TO DO SO, NOT FORCED.

The whole ordeal is just to sell you less for more. Cut content out, resell it as dlc, use the always online to make suffer you suffer as much as you can, etc. This is not paranoia, this is pure facts and observations(factual observations can not be wrong in this case).

If anything like in ME3 gets pulled in DA:Liquidation - i mean inquisition, then i'm not buying.

Underlined is dealbreaker, italic is not buying if so but would try out, bold is no buy is after trying it out if possible
.
List of things to check against buying rpg games - bioware da3 edition:
Does it let me play singleplayer as an older game would, with no online component or one optional on/off one?
Does it have a meaningful, gripping and good story?
Does it utilize EA's current trends about hiding behind the LGBT community?
Does it push EA's "gay" agenda? I do not have a problem with the LGBT community, i have a problem with their portrayal of gay people. Not everyone is flaming or queerishlike, and that's not the problem. It's how EA and the devs try to shove it in my face every single time there's an opportunity. Or they make more opportunities. Read:  Leliana, Zevran was fine. Anders, Fenris was not.
Is the writing done by X and Y, and is it as bad as it looks like?
Is there a PLAYABLE, WORTHWHILE, NON-DRM infested, not always online Demo of it?
Will my imports mean as many fiddlesticks(READ: nothing, none, cameos, ugh) as in DA2, or the even more dreaded The witcher - The witcher 2 transition, or ME1,2 to ME3?
Is it as overpriced as most games are?
Does it use Origin?

See that list? Make notes.

[billy the squid]

[quote]Allan Schumacher wrote...

[quote]billy the squid wrote...

The sales deals, the ability to run things in offline mode, if I wan't as well as general online stability and now the recent addition to trade licenses digitally on steam.[/quote]

Has this actually happened yet?  I remember hearing some news from Germany but don't know the details, nor how widespread it is.


[quote]The issues with Diablo 3 and SimCity is that it's not a form of DRM, perhaps in a cynical roundabout way it is, because it's designed to always be online. Diablo 3 got that sorted out, it's impossible to pirate it, to my knowledge. SimCity, the higher ups in the company said that the online requirement was necessary, like Diablo 3, except it was found out not to be, that playing it offline is possible.[/quote]

I know the "we offload calculations" was overstated (and not handled super well), although aren't there still issues?  I have briefly played the game, and I am not sure if the games could be saved, nor if the full effects of the region and whatnot are proprerly taken into account (i.e. at best it's static, and I don't think you could build the great works).

[/quote][/quote]

The tradable game license hasn't happened yet, but EU law on digital rights and the rights of users to sell on the license is a fairly fuzzy area of Copyright law. The decision in Europe last year was the first legal indication that EULA cannot constrain the purchaser by preventing them disposing of the product. Personally I think the Steam system will be a number of years off before it's sorted out.

It seems to apply to all games on steam, the license can be traded between users. The mechanics and whether there will be a cost/ price to the user buying/ selling, I haven't heard yet.

The main thing with SimCity, was that while it needs online to operate to full capacity and utilise the online connected world, no one thought to put an offline option in, for precisely this issue with the servers? I think it would have gone over more smoothly had people been able to play it offline as well, when the servers were overloaded. I would have been annoyed as hell, but I can still play a game that I bought, and spend the next few days exploring and building my city until the server issue gets sorted. It's not ideal, but it's a comprimise. EA went the all or nothing approach, without the back up inplace.

Can you imagine if this was a CoD game? 6 million users in the first day, it would have been horrifying. IMO an approach to stagger user numbers is needed, beyond region locking, the imprssion I get is that publishers want to jump straight into the always online world without thinking through the logistics properly, hence Diablo 3 and SimCity debacles. 

Edit: 

I think the save issue is sorted, but the persistent online world and region effects aren't taken into account, but most people accept that as the price of playing offline though.

Modifié par billy the squid, 07 avril 2013 - 11:12 .

[AlanC9]

Sakatox wrote...

Does it utilize EA's current trends about hiding behind the LGBT community?
Does it push EA's "gay" agenda? I do not have a problem with the LGBT community, i have a problem with their portrayal of gay people. Not everyone is flaming or queerishlike, and that's not the problem. It's how EA and the devs try to shove it in my face every single time there's an opportunity. Or they make more opportunities. Read:  Leliana, Zevran was fine. Anders, Fenris was not

Why are you forcing all  this LGBT-related content on the thread? If I wanted to read about gay characters, I'd read one of the threads about them. 

(/satire)

Hiding behind? Hiding from what?

Modifié par AlanC9, 07 avril 2013 - 04:11 .

[AlanC9]

bEVEsthda wrote...
And I support Steam. Steam is good. It offers all kinds of well managed and positive services to paying customers. And I've found it more a convenience than inconvenience.
- And, very important, I trust Steam.

(Snip)

As for EA and Origin, it's a very long way uphill to get their act together. And despite that I've seen this discussed for years, I fail to see that EA has taken one single step
A DRM that seriously inconvenience a paying customer, and spits an affronting "it's not your game, and you'll only be able to play it for as long as we feel it makes business sense", spits it straight into the face, followed by a *friendly* "if you don't like it, take your business elsewhere", otoh, is an entirely different thing.

Why trust Steam and not Origin? As far as I can tell they're the same thing; fairly useless but only minor inconveniences.

I guess it's because I've never seen any advantages to Steam, maybe. And having to DL a few hundred MB of content for every game was way annoying back when I was on dial-up, though I suppose it's unfair to blame that on Steam.

[i](And how can anybody fail to see that ME3's ending will be a PR disaster? Though it's not part of our discussion here, only another of many examples of how something is seriously wrong with EA culture)

Should higher-ups at EA have overruled Bio on the ending?

[Allan Schumacher]

It's awfully funny how you make optimistic statements about drm-infested, internet-connection restricted cloud computing for gaming.

I was answering a technical question based on the ability to utilize hardware systems and bandwidth for multiple games. It actually has no bearing on any sort of optimism (nor pessimism) for always online connections.

The unfortunate thing is after reading the confrontational nature of your opening line, I didn't read the rest of your post.

[Brockololly]

billy the squid wrote...

The main thing with SimCity, was that while it needs online to operate to full capacity and utilise the online connected world, no one thought to put an offline option in, for precisely this issue with the servers? I think it would have gone over more smoothly had people been able to play it offline as well, when the servers were overloaded. I would have been annoyed as hell, but I can still play a game that I bought, and spend the next few days exploring and building my city until the server issue gets sorted. It's not ideal, but it's a comprimise. EA went the all or nothing approach, without the back up inplace.

Right. If EA put in an offline mode even now, I think that would do a good deal to improve their image. Yet for whatever reason, they seem dead set against that, even as modders have shown it wouldn't be hard to do. This is especially true once you realize that a good number of people don't really care about the Always Online social aspects of the game, many of which aren't even working properly.

I think thats where the accusations of Always Online DRM start to stick with SimCity, is that given all of the problems the online connectivity is having, why not toss in an offline mode? The claims Maxis and EA gave initially claiming that would be impossible have been proven to be complete BS. Yet they still don't do it. It would be something that would add value to the end user's experience and yet they refuse to accomodate.

And for me, thats precisely the sort of attitude that contributes to my deficit of trust with a company like EA. They have a big problem and a clear solution that would help gamers and they seemingly thumb their nose at the solution and stick their fingers in their ears and say "I'm not listening!" Its baffling to me.

billy the squid wrote...
Can you imagine if this was a CoD game? 6 million users in the first day, it would have been horrifying. IMO an approach to stagger user numbers is needed, beyond region locking, the imprssion I get is that publishers want to jump straight into the always online world without thinking through the logistics properly, hence Diablo 3 and SimCity debacles.

I'm wondering if thats what'll end up happening with the next Xbox since it seems it requiring an always online connection seem to be true. How many people end up buying a new Xbox only to come home and see it requires an online connection and get pissed?

As for staggering users, isn't that basically what they did with TOR? Had a bit of a staggered launch? That is still problematic though. If I buy a game I expect to be able to play it, not have to wait in a virtual line. Come on.

billy the squid wrote...
I think the save issue is sorted, but the persistent online world and region effects aren't taken into account, but most people accept that as the price of playing offline though.

I don't think they have Cheetah mode back in which is pretty atrocious, taking out a core gameplay mechanic.

AlanC9 wrote...
Why trust Steam and not Origin? As far as I can tell they're the same thing; fairly useless but only minor inconveniences.

I guess it's because I've never seen any advantages to Steam, maybe. And  having to DL a few hundred MB of content for every game was way annoying back when I was on dial-up, though I suppose it's unfair to blame that  on Steam.

If you're only looking at Steam versus Origin as DRM, then sure they're about the same. Functionally though Steam has a ton of other features that make it a more attractive platform. You have Steam Workshop support for modding in games, you have the frequent Steam sales, you have a very easy to use storefront, you have easy to use friends lists and chat functions, you've got cloud saving if you want it, you've got SteamPlay for PC and Mac games, you've got the Steam mobile app, you've got Steam Big Picture mode for playing games on TV with a controller, you can easily buy DLC without having to buy imaginary currency first... and so on.

Steam still has issues, but it adds a lot of value compared to other platforms like Origin.

Modifié par Brockololly, 07 avril 2013 - 05:44 .

[MerAnne]

Something that EA, Bioware, and everyone else who has visions of online only games - Not everyone has a high speed internet connection. I have two lovely choices for connections: Dialup and Wireless. Although Wireless is faster than dial-up, the speed is nothing to get excited about. The download speed varies from 10 kb/second to 100 kb/second. Think about how THAT would impact game play. It doesn't vary based on whether I'm using the gaming computer or my laptop. The best speeds? Between 1am and 6am, since I have a day job, not really an option. (I don't include satellite because of the dropped internet connections - my neighbor paid quite a bit for satellite)

So Cloud, servers, number of servers...... There are quite a few people that find all of that meaningless because we can't use them. That is in the US, do gamers live only in areas/countries that have high speed internet connections?

For every gamer that is like me (no option for high speed internet), requiring a constant internet connection makes it impossible for me to play. The bells and whistles, the fancy servers, the Cloud, none of that matters because the game will be so painfully slow that playing becomes a chore rather than a pleasure.

[Maverick827]

I actually like Origin better than Steam. I never use any of those Steam features, and Origin has the better GUI that let's me jump into my game quicker. That annoying Steam window keeps popping up whenever I hotkey Shift in a game, too. Whenever I boot up my PC and there's a Steam update, it brings up a downloading window, whereas Origin updates on the background. You have to have an internet connection to enable offline mode in Steam. What?

I'm sure I can change the Steam settings to fix some of these, but if we're being pedantic to find every little thing we don't like about EA/Origin, why not Steam as well?

[Sakatox]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sakatox wrote...

Does it utilize EA's current trends about hiding behind the LGBT community?
Does it push EA's "gay" agenda? I do not have a problem with the LGBT community, i have a problem with their portrayal of gay people. Not everyone is flaming or queerishlike, and that's not the problem. It's how EA and the devs try to shove it in my face every single time there's an opportunity. Or they make more opportunities. Read:  Leliana, Zevran was fine. Anders, Fenris was not

Why are you forcing all  this LGBT-related content on the thread? If I wanted to read about gay characters, I'd read one of the threads about them. 

(/satire)

Hiding behind? Hiding from what?

Hiding behind as in taking cover. Taking cover from all the flak about the quality of any EA game.
Have a problem with choices meaning nothing? "You must be hating on the gays, that's right, YOU HOMOPHOBE MYSOGINYST CIS-GENDERED PIG. CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE."
Have a problem at all? "You must not be supporting of our accepting and integrating nature!"
"You just don't like the game because you have a problem with this and that (insert lgbt stuff there.)"
Don't like the online component? Similar answers.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It's
awfully funny how you make optimistic statements about drm-infested,
internet-connection restricted cloud computing for gaming.

I
was answering a technical question based on the ability to utilize
hardware systems and bandwidth for multiple games. It actually has no
bearing on any sort of optimism (nor pessimism) for always online
connections.

The unfortunate thing is after reading the
confrontational nature of your opening line, I didn't read the rest of
your post.

So whoever dares challenge the concept of that deserves a good ignore? Good to know things haven't changed in the BSN at all. Mods being ignorant as ever. "Confrontation? In my BSN? This didn't happen, no no no."

Carefully waiting for the banhammer again, as that seems to be the trend these days. Speak out loudly or strong against something? Not on our glorious bioware forums! Everyone must get along at all times, everytime! Now let's all hold hands and sing something nice while we smoke on the native american peace pipe.

Modifié par Sakatox, 07 avril 2013 - 07:03 .

[Rawgrim]

You don`t get banned for speaking out loudly. You get banned for personal attacks. If you attack the opposition`s person, you have moved away from the subject of the discussion, and lost it by changing the subject.

[Enigmatick]

"Hiding behind as in taking cover. Taking cover from all the flak about the quality of any EA game.
Have a problem with choices meaning nothing? "You must be hating on the gays, that's right, YOU HOMOPHOBE MYSOGINYST CIS-GENDERED PIG. CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE."
Have a problem at all? "You must not be supporting of our accepting and integrating nature!"
"You just don't like the game because you have a problem with this and that (insert lgbt stuff there.)"
Don't like the online component? Similar answers."

 Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be autistic.

Modifié par Enigmatick, 07 avril 2013 - 07:08 .

[Sakatox]

Rawgrim wrote...

You don`t get banned for speaking out loudly. You get banned for personal attacks. If you attack the opposition`s person, you have moved away from the subject of the discussion, and lost it by changing the subject.

That's a nice avenue of thinking, but people actually get banned for voicing their opinions, as previously on the BSN. It was the very reason that triggered the creation of the registered DA2 discussion forum section. The influx of people that didn't like BiowEAre's Dragon Age 2. There also were posts censored. Long posts about why da2 is bad and how the company(Bw) is moving in the wrong direction. At least 2 of them were a long post, then reduced to one line about how da2 is bad - or somesuch.

On the Old republic forums, people got banned for showing how to unsubscribe when the button disappeared for "reasons unknown".

When the actions do not meet the words, that's when i get "paranoid". As shown above, even now it is happening, just on a smaller scale because DA2's storm moved on. I won't get banned for my opinion, i am going to be banned because i do not fit in the happy image of the Bsn.

Addendum: Not to mention the storm ME3 caused. I'm still amazed how bad me3 is.

Enigmatick wrote...

"Hiding behind as in taking cover. Taking cover from all the flak about the quality of any EA game.
Have
a problem with choices meaning nothing? "You must be hating on the
gays, that's right, YOU HOMOPHOBE MYSOGINYST CIS-GENDERED PIG. CHECK
YOUR PRIVILEGE."
Have a problem at all? "You must not be supporting of our accepting and integrating nature!"
"You just don't like the game because you have a problem with this and that (insert lgbt stuff there.)"
Don't like the online component? Similar answers."

Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling
people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these
boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be
autistic.

Autistic? Are you seriously using that word? Do you know what autism means? Or are you just generally talking without thinking?

The current trend after madden and da2/me3 is that you must be hating the
lgbts/gays if you don't like EA. There's no changing in that, unless EA itself does something about this. The whole backpedaling and damage-control they did with those youtube videos...

EA does this after winning 2012's worst company in america, Bank of America coming in a close second with EA shills voting for BoA.



Before i get called off-topic:
This is about how EA and BioWare tries to control people, same with an online component.

Modifié par Sakatox, 07 avril 2013 - 07:53 .

[Dendio1]

As a paying customer I feel somewhat ripped off seeing others get the games freely. At the same time, I feel bad for those who put so much time and effort into creating great games also being ripped off.

Pirating makes everyone feel bad except the pirate

Modifié par Dendio1, 07 avril 2013 - 08:15 .

[Rawgrim]

Dendio1 wrote...

As a paying customer I feel somewhat ripped off seeing others get the games freely. At the same time, I feel bad for those who put so much time and effort into creating great games also being ripped off.

Pirating makes everyone feel bad except the pirate

True. Wich is why it makes no sense that the game developers should punish loyal paying customers for things pirates are doing. The only ones who are not getting punished are the pirates themselves.

[Brockololly]

Enigmatick wrote...
 Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be autistic.

I think he's referring to Peter Moore's recent blog post defending EA against them likely winning the Consumerist's poll for Worst Company in America for the second year in a row. Moore basically tries to shift blame and lumps in people that have issues with SimCity, microtransactions and Origin with homophobic bigots. classy.

The Consumerist has a nice rebuttal to Moore's post actually.

Modifié par Brockololly, 07 avril 2013 - 08:25 .

[Beliar86]

I bought me3 as you can see but play the pirated version because screw origin, that's why. Data points will probably just show another pirated copy and assume it's stolen and not a personal protest against running origin.

[slimgrin]

Brockololly wrote...

Enigmatick wrote...
 Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be autistic.

I think he's referring to Peter Moore's recent blog post defending EA against them likely winning the Consumerist's poll for Worst Company in America for the second year in a row. Moore basically tries to shift blame and lumps in people that have issues with SimCity, microtransactions and Origin with homophobic bigots. classy.

The Consumerist has a nice rebuttal to Moore's post actually.

Ha, nice rebuttal. Yeah, Moore's post is classic EA. Spin baby spin.

Modifié par slimgrin, 07 avril 2013 - 08:30 .

[Enigmatick]

[
quote]Brockololly wrote...

[quote]Enigmatick wrote...
 Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be autistic.[/quote]

I think he's referring to Peter Moore's recent blog post defending EA against them likely winning the Consumerist's poll for Worst Company in America for the second year in a row. Moore basically tries to shift blame and lumps in people that have issues with SimCity, microtransactions and Origin with homophobic bigots. classy.

The Consumerist has a nice rebuttal to Moore's post actually.
[/quote]


Ah, ok then I thought he was just deluded into think that EA blamed poor madden sales "cis male scum" or something. 

[Sakatox]

Enigmatick wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

Enigmatick wrote...
 Are you actually implying that EA defends all of their games by calling people homophobic? I mean I hate all of the social justice on these boards as much as the next guy but I think you may actually be autistic.

I think he's referring to Peter Moore's recent blog post defending EA against them likely winning the Consumerist's poll for Worst Company in America for the second year in a row. Moore basically tries to shift blame and lumps in people that have issues with SimCity, microtransactions and Origin with homophobic bigots. classy.

The Consumerist has a nice rebuttal to Moore's post actually.

Ah, ok then I thought he was just deluded into think that EA blamed poor madden sales "cis male scum" or something. 

If they could without looking like bozos, they would.

Modifié par Sakatox, 07 avril 2013 - 08:36 .

[Maverick827]

Brockololly wrote...

The Consumerist has a nice rebuttal to Moore's post actually.

Nice rebuttal?  That article reads like a troll post.  It's somehow more biased against EA than EA is biased in favor of itself.  These "game review" (or "consumer review," in this case) websites are utter tripe and written by absolute hacks.