By John Walker on March 11th, 2013 at 1:00 pm.
EA reports that SimCity is slowly getting into a state where it’s playable. Many of the launch issues are getting sorted, and soon it may well be in such a place that it becomes functional. So we should forgive and forget, right? Wrong.
Nathan wrote a piece about SimCity last week, discussing how the situation should never have happened, but that EA had done well in response. I don’t entirely agree. Because there was only one valid response from EA after the clusterfuck of SimCity’s launch: capitulation. A full admission that the DRM that infests their game was needless, a bad mistake, and that they’re working to strip it out for single-player games as quickly as possible.
Claiming SimCity fixed, by removing the server queues, random crashes, lost cities, server drops, and the artificial restrictions placed on the game just to make it run, is like claiming a broken leg fixed because you’ve mended the crutches. The game, by its very design, is hideously broken, and like Diablo III before it, it has only served to scream a complete disregard for sense and a massive disregard for customers. So what we mustn’t do now is say, “Well, teething problems.”
These aren’t teething problems. These are continuous deep-running flaws designed to cripple the game for you as a player, simply to serve some nebulous notion of protecting the game against piracy.
But no! cry EA and their more loyal defenders. The online is there for the players! It’s not DRM, it’s about enhancing the game, it’s designed that way, it’s it’s it’s… It’s all bollocks. Yes, SimCity offers some multiplayer options that sound a lot of fun. Being able to build cities near your chums, create trade routes with them, share resources, be affected both positively and negatively by your neighbours. Ranked leaderboards, cloud-saved cities, perhaps even world-wide events at a later stage? And of course everything is always up-to-date, latest patch, etc. This is all brilliant stuff. If I want it.
What EA and Maxis have done with SimCity is attempt a year-long PR assault to suggest that the online-only nature of SimCity is designed to offer enhancements for gamers. This is simply not true. It’s utter rubbish. It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two. The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact. I do worry it’s maybe already too late.
To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It’s a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher’s burrowing.
Years back we would get up in arms about entering codes to launch single-player games. Now it’s as natural a part of the installation process as choosing the install directory. Damn it, it was only the last two years where we stood up and shouted down Ubisoft for their ghastly, cruel and completely useless always-on DRM, and they wisely capitulated and removed it. They must be staring in confusion and horror as people excuse EA for SimCity, and Activision for Diablo III. Tolerating this idiocy is how it will become the norm.
It is simple. SimCity, of course, could be a single-player game. Ignore the utter nonsense about how some of its computations are server-side. What complete rot. As if our PCs are incapable of running the game. I’m sure some of the computations are server side! But they damned well don’t need to be, as all of gaming ever has ably proven. By breaking the running of the game in two, EA have given themselves a neat way out of being able to flick a switch such that it runs as it ought. That can be fixed. That can be changed. They just have to have a customer base conscious enough to demand that they do, and develop the basic shreds of respect for their players to do so.
SimCity, in the state it’s in, whether the servers are up or down, the Cheetah mode switched on or off, is an insult to you. It’s a gross, bawdy guffaw at just how much you’ll put up with in the name of “fighting piracy”. They’re laughing at you, while you hand over your £45 for a game that maybe works sometimes.
I feel very bad for many of the developers at Maxis, who would have set out to make the best game they could. They, of all people, should possibly be the angriest – to see their creation so needlessly broken, so cruelly and stupidly trapped in an online-only prison, cursed to piss players off where it should be providing them fun. I would like to see them speak out too – they should have their voices heard, let them express their frustration.
SimCity could be a very splendid single-player game, and one that could then be taken online for other funs. It’s perfect laptop-on-the-train gaming (especially with such stupidly tiny cities), that’s rendered impossible to play on a laptop on the train. It’s ideal flight fodder, that no one can play on flights. It’s a game that of course should be able to fill an evening when the internet’s gone down, that shall fill no such evenings.
Always-on DRM is a disease that we cannot allow ourselves to be so willingly infected by. It’s a curse on gaming. It’s diminishing our experiences, reducing the possibilities for our play, and creating a space where faulty games are accepted as complete. Always-on DRM is a broken game. They need to be fixed.
Photo credits:
Image 1 by Bart Everson
Image 2 by Albert duce
Images 3-5 by Infrogmation of New Orleans
11/03/2013 at 13:04 Ravenholme says:
Yes. That is all.
11/03/2013 at 13:32 yogibbear says:
***DISCLAIMER*** I have enjoyed my time with the game so far, but these are ultimately HUGE failures and signs that despite the server issues this game should NEVER have been released yet *******************************
WHO CARES ABOUT THE DAMN SERVERS, I have played the game for ~50 hrs and let me tell you at the CORE it is ROTTEN and BROKEN as a city simulation.
a) Only 10% of your workforce will actually WORK. 90% are retirees supposably. So you will ALWAYS have high demand for workers and everyone will complain that they are broke once you reach tier 3. Numerical density development of your town is F************** beyond low wealth initial starting where a more REASONABLE 66% of your population WORKS.
b) 16 player maps CANNOT share between all 16 regions as you need to be connected by road/rail/water/etc. which are limited usually to only 3-4 other cities for each city meaning it isn’t a 16 player share fest asides from tech + research unlocks which don’t require roads
c) mid-late game ALL services (fire/police/recycling/sewage/etc.) are ALL BROKEN. Once you build 2 x sewage plants, buildings will constantly get backed up sewage as it is simulated wrong, paying $10k/hr for those 4 x fire departments, and you’ll have buildings NEXT DOOR TO YOUR FIRE DEPARTMENT that they will NEVER RESPOND TO, and sit there saying “ready to respond”.
d) If you don’t own the DLC you can’t reclaim other people’s cities that have that DLC
e) Region trade/tourism/etc. is all SERVER SIDE and because the servers are terrible this means if they go down/you lose connection while playing… guess what you GET 0 TOURISTS for that month and your casino town is now BROKE. RESTART YOUR CITIES
f) there is no undo button. No way to get cash back for incorrect placement of buildings
g) layout maps are INCORRECT and do not correctly show you the placement for maximum density
TLDR: Don’t buy this game till the core mechanics are fixed. Yes it’s fun, but it is only fun to keep restarting cities and breaking the game by using supplying chain economics to offset the RIDICULOUS imposition of pathetic late game numerical FLAWS in the core of this game e.g. 10% workers, no working services etc.
11/03/2013 at 13:47 AngoraFish says:
If it took you 50 hours to work all this out I reckon you still got your money’s worth.
11/03/2013 at 13:48 yogibbear says:
That’s the disclaimer. I enjoy breaking things. (I’m an engineer at heart). Just saving you guys the hassle and telling you what to look for in patch notes beyond offline mode.
11/03/2013 at 14:29 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Yeah, awesome post. I really appreciate commentators that can poke around at the game and give more info than the review. (I mean, info adding to the review)
Everything else I’ve read just says the game is great but broken. For some reason it’s good to know that it’s not really great, but still broken. Broken on many levels, apparently.
11/03/2013 at 19:50 Lagwolf says:
I am a reviewer/beta-tester and I know the enjoyment from breaking programs/finding out how inherently messed up they are. You long list is a good start and there is more besides.
11/03/2013 at 18:49 Nallen says:
Is that a joke, 50 hours for a SimCity game that costs £65 with the day 1 DLC? The “city” size is so laughably small it’s an insult to the series.
11/03/2013 at 14:14 aepervius says:
To which I would add : utility are broken by design. Sure it is neat to see your power come back by small chunk, or water slowly feed homes. But with that comes two huge problems :
1) those chunks seems to run in circle sometimes which thermodynamically make no sense whatsoever.
It seems that the power only search for a way from point A to point B, then in some case run in circle.
This also happens with garbage truck which run behind another garbage truck, the first one filling the second one staying empty, rather than go to another part of the city with garbage. Same with police and Fire truck or even ambulance.
2) even if you have 50 megawatt *in surplus* the power bubble sent toward the city are coming very slowly, almost as if it does not scale properly, resulting in a very strange very slow ramp up of big building (my exposition tourist attraction takes literally hours to ramp up, despite having 50+ surplus MW).
That agent things from glass box, is nice if you want to emulate entity like people / firms/shops/house in a Simcity like simulation. But for utility, or even heck stuff like power it is utterly useless a gimmick which adds no depth, only add complexity for no gain. The simulation would have been much better off with a simple fill by distance/density algorithm rather than quantic power/water agent feeding separate building.
Simcity is definitively broken, in many ways. It is nice, good looking, entertaining, but it does not have the staying power of SC4 even in sandbox mode.
11/03/2013 at 14:19 Revisor says:
Commenting here to corroborate your point. There is a huge list of bugs and most of them are connected to the individual simulation, the one point that should have made this a great new game.
http://www.reddit.com/r/SimCity/comments/1a0taq/compiled_list_of_suggestions_and_bug_reports_to/
There is nothing fun about all firefighters responding to the same fire even though there are more raging elsewhere, or the cars being blocked in such a way that you have to bulldoze the whole intersection.
11/03/2013 at 14:35 Hahaha says:
Suggestions listed under ‘MAJOR ISSUE/GAMBREAKING’ …why?
11/03/2013 at 19:16 Machinations says:
I don`t know, looks like everything game breaking is indeed game breaking, but if there are some organizational issues on such a massive list of bugs, you`ll have to excuse the people who compiled it.
After all, they aren`t paid beta testers from Q&A. They are paying customers who were shipped a broken product, so you`ll have to excuse formatting errors and the lack of TPS reports.
11/03/2013 at 15:25 roryok says:
I’m not sure if you’re describing a game or modern city planning issues
11/03/2013 at 15:35 phuzz says:
I’m afraid I’m going to have to dock you one internet for not using the phrase: “And in the game?”.
11/03/2013 at 16:49 roryok says:
aw.
11/03/2013 at 16:57 Methodric says:
The mechanics aren’t broken, you just don’t seem to understand how they work. I have 175k population in my city, one fire department (2 trucks, one marshal, one hazmat), one hospital (4 ambulances, no expansions, 2 wellness vans), one sewage treatment plant, and one garbage dump. Not only does my town have 10-20k/hr profit, my recycling centre can get me 200-300k a day from recyclables. I’m even providing fire/garbage/recycle/water/sewage/police AND power to my 4 nearest cities. I’v even had to deal with an earthquake, and a dinosaur rampaging through the city. I currently only make money on basic services, I have only one trade depot and one casino. Transportation is my current highest expense. Every month I need to enable and disable services based on demand, and I’m pretty sure my tax fluctuates about 5% every month. I sit anywhere between 60-80% satisfaction (depending on how long my taxes have been up or down)
I reckon I can hit 250k pop with just optimizing some of my waterfront property.. I didn’t give the beach enough room so houses can’t get bigger =/ High density gives MASSSSSIVE amounts of population. I grew from 25k to 175k without adjusting much more then increasing land value.
The game is not broken, you just don’t seem to want to optimize your city.
11/03/2013 at 17:20 Tanksenior says:
The fact that you have figured out how to optimize your city doesn’t mean the mechanics aren’t inherently broken. The problems these people describe are real and not to be dismissed so lightly. An especially bad reason for this is just because you’ve found some ways to circumvent these problems.
11/03/2013 at 19:58 Methodric says:
It’s not circumvention, it’s playing the game. The whole point of the smaller map is to constrain you into tweaking rather then expanding. As someone else said, the same issues facing every city planner.
11/03/2013 at 20:25 Machinations says:
So, to pick just one example, all fire trucks reponding to the same fire while other fires rage throughout the city is not a bug, its a feature
I`m astounded that you can review that list of bugs, containing so many, as we call them in the industry, show-stoppers, and still imply the game is not filled with problems.
This is completely outside the always-online thing. Strip that away, you still have a very buggy game.
12/03/2013 at 02:44 smb says:
Indeed, it’s an inconvenient oversight, but not a game breaking one. People are simply compounding the issue by throwing piss-poor management philosophies into the mix. “Can’t get all the fires? BUILD MORE FIRE TRUCKS!” instead of optimizing their transit system and reducing fire risk through other means.
12/03/2013 at 03:11 Mario Figueiredo says:
@Methodric, I don’t think you have played SimCity previous titles. All the way back to even the original game, this was never a problem. City services always operated as expected and never displayed this type of behavior.
I think we can all agree this is a bug and will be fixed. We can certainly refuse to look at it as a reason to avoid the game (there’s plenty of better reasons, the city sizes being a better one). But to try to pretend that all fire trucks moving to a single fire, or garbage trucks being stopped by traffic, is an actual game feature that requires our thinking hats is disingenuous at best. It doesn’t even make for a good simulation of real-life cities (Fires are taken dead serious and garbage trucks operate at times of day where there is minimum traffic).
11/03/2013 at 17:26 Zeewolf says:
What’s this then, someone with a very vivid imagination?
http://www.reddit.com/r/SimCity/comments/1a0taq/compiled_list_of_suggestions_and_bug_reports_to/
12/03/2013 at 00:30 malkav11 says:
I care about the servers because ultimately even the best game ever made cannot be allowed to get away with always-on DRM. (In fact, particularly the best games, because they are the greatest loss to the medium if we allow them to be dependent on external servers.) That SimCity sounds to have made some substantial design compromises will only become relevant if EA ever backs down on the DRM.
11/03/2013 at 13:38 Deano2099 says:
It’s an online multiplayer game, and as such I have no interest in it whatsoever. But I can’t agree that it’s completely broken. It’s just not what some people wanted. Sure, it could make a great single-player game, but I have Sim City 4 and that’s a great single player game and this doesn’t look much different.
Plus World of Warcraft would make a great single-player game. Guild Wars would make a great single-player game. TF2 could be a great single-player game. I’d love a DOTA2 with a single-player meta-campaign on top of it as well. There’s plenty of online games that could make great single-player offline games with a minimum of tweaks.
SimCity isn’t broken, it’s just an online multiplayer title. If that doesn’t interest you it’s not the game for you. I think that’s what should be pushed here, rather than claiming that it’s just broken. Unless you’re saying it’s broken as a single player game. But that’s like saying your washing machine is broken as it won’t toast bread.
11/03/2013 at 13:44 battles_atlas says:
Deano aren’t you missing the rather loud point that its not an online multiplayer game, its just been claimed as one to trojan horse anti-piracy measures into the game. I’ve seen nothing so far in the reviews (haven’t bought if for the reasons outlined in John’s piece) to suggest that the online aspects make more than a cursory addition to the game – certainly nothing so fundamental to mean that it has to be played online.
12/03/2013 at 03:03 smb says:
Funny, the complaints I’ve seen in reviews regarding multiplayer boil down to: “Feels like a single-player game, except your city gets screwed over by other people eventually.” Gee, do they have any concept of what cooperative play entails? Help each other and reap the benefits; fail to communicate with your team and you ALL suffer. There is a ton of potential in SimCity’s multiplayer, but no one is bothering to even try because they’ve got the single-player stick up their rear.
Also, if you approach WoW like a single-player game (soloing, which most MMOs goes out of their way to balance around) the multiplayer aspect feels incredibly shallow and contrived. I know because this is how I played them for countless years. I used to be intrigued by the notion of being part of a larger “living” world with other players in a fantasy world and blah blah, but in the end realized that the existence of random strangers do more to ruin the illusion than they can ever do to help it. Those fuckers just steal your loot and kill credit, regurgitate memes and vomit obscenities all over the place. It’s little more than playing a single-player RPG with the Internet if you don’t bother trying to socialize and make friends.
12/03/2013 at 03:28 Mario Figueiredo says:
What team are you talking about?
You can either play the game in private or public mode. In private mode you actually have to call in your friends to occupy slots. In public mode you have no control over who does what. If you have friends and If you play more than them, you are out of luck. You risk growing beyond them and suffering the consequences. You’ll have to actually time city development and probably have to convince someone to build the type of city they didn’t want.
All this makes for a rather pale co-op experience. The only benefit of all this coordination effort is some kind of resource to trickle into your city. All because people are playing small towns, not large cities. The coop features of simcity can at best be described as artificial. It’s a rather sad turn of events actually, considering the depth and scope of what SimCity used to be.
Now, if co-op had been implemented at more advanced stages of city development, then could have become a more interesting game. Could citizens from a large neighbor city come sleep at mine? Could your well developed business centers be an attractive job prospect for my citizens? Could Frank’s large airport there be a good source of tourism for both of us? Could my fire department help with your current predicament?
A co-op simcity where city planning wasn’t constrained by resource trading (like two medieval cities), but influential (like two modern cities) would have made for a much better game. You could build your cities how you liked — which is what simcity was always about — and still be playing the coop game.
11/03/2013 at 13:46 Cinek says:
“It’s an online multiplayer game” – it’s not truth. It’s a single player game with added social options. That’s pretty much all.
11/03/2013 at 13:58 GSGregory says:
And mount and blade would be a great online only game, and torch light 2 would be awesome as multiplayer only. Civ 5 doesn’t need single player. Terraria should be online only.
And on and on that list can go.
This game is not a mmo. However the game has been forcefully setup that you must play it as such. It isn’t a multiplayer only game. It is a online only game. That is a big difference. There is no need for the forced online requirements what so ever. This setup would be like xbox or ps3 requiring an internet connection to play ff13 or star ocean so that you can share screens with your friends.
What no one seems to have hit on is that fact that when ea gets bored with supporting this game they are going to shut the servers down. Which will happen in a year or two when the next one releases as their track record shows. So really everyone is simply renting access for a time.
11/03/2013 at 14:13 Deano2099 says:
And World of Warcraft can also be described with the following:
“It isn’t a multiplayer only game. It is a online only game. That is a big difference. There is no need for the forced online requirements what so ever. ”
You can easily spend 100s of hours on WoW without interacting with other human characters at all. There’s no reason not to take that experience and stick it in a single-player game other than profit-motive. Yet it doesn’t get a hard time for it.
I love the Sim City games, I don’t want an online multi-player title, so I won’t buy this. Same as I’ll buy Dragon Age 3 but not Neverwinter Online. I’m disappointed they didn’t make an offline, single-player Sim City instead. But I’d rather people judged a game on what it tries to do rather than what it doesn’t try to do. I’d even go as far as to suggest people don’t buy it, so there’s a bigger chance the next one won’t be like this. But it’s not broken. It was designed this way. There’s a big difference.
11/03/2013 at 14:29 Brun says:
I get your point, but you’ll never convince the people here. It’s a shame that EA decided to take the series this way, but as owners of the IP that’s their prerogative. There is no rule that says “All SimCity games made in all eternity must be single-player offline probabilistic city simulators with large plots, terraforming, and mod support.”
If people don’t want what EA is delivering, then other companies and other IPs will step up to the plate and drive them out of the market.
11/03/2013 at 14:34 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Exactly what people are criticizing Simcity for is what it “tries” to do.
Here’s the critique- What it tries to do, it fails at.
That has nothing to do with WoW or whatever…
11/03/2013 at 14:36 Hahaha says:
Has RPS offered any alternatives people should try or look out for instead of supporting this game?
11/03/2013 at 14:36 Sparkasaurusmex says:
If you scroll up and read the post we’re nested under it’s about game mechanics, nothing to do with multiplayer or online.
11/03/2013 at 14:37 Sparkasaurusmex says:
@hahaha
for city building, probably SimCity4
for the agent thing, definitely Tropico 4.
11/03/2013 at 14:41 Neo says:
That the game is deliberately designed to be anti-consumer doesn’t excuse it being anti consumer.
Besides, the difference between Sim City and games like WoW, TF2, Dota etc is that people go into the latter expecting multiplayer content. People buy city simulation games to simulate cities, all the social features are a nice addition for the people who care about them but it’s not what people paid money for.
11/03/2013 at 14:47 Brun says:
difference between Sim City and games like WoW, TF2, Dota etc is that people go into the latter expecting multiplayer content
Oh, excuse me. I didn’t realize that you spoke for all people now.
11/03/2013 at 14:49 S Jay says:
You CAN spend 100 in WoW without interacting with humans – still the core of the game is the interaction, the raiding, the guilds, etc etc etc. The quests tend to be bland. SimCity on the other hand is the opposite: the core of the fun is building your own city and you CAN interact with others, but you don’t really need – all the people using private regions, for example, have no reason to be online.
11/03/2013 at 14:57 Neo says:
Oh, excuse me. I didn’t realize that you spoke for all people now.
Is this a joke?
“One of the most popular online action games of all time” – Steam TF2 Page
“One of the most played online games in the world” – Steam Dota 2 Page
“World of Warcraft is an online game where players from around the world assume the roles of heroic fantasy characters and explore a virtual world full of mystery, magic, and endless adventure.” – ‘What is WoW’ Page from the WoW Game Guide
You’re telling me you don’t expect online multiplayer content in these games?
11/03/2013 at 15:04 Brun says:
Your statement implied that people were expecting SimCity to be single-player. How can you be so sure that there wasn’t a sizable group of people out there that expects *all* of their games to be multiplayer? It’s a pretty common expectation among younger gamers. Perhaps EA was targeting this group?
11/03/2013 at 17:15 Vorphalack says:
EA carpet bombed the internet with SimCity adverts. They were bloody everywhere, not targeting sites frequented by a single demographic. The adverts did not imply that the game is inherently multi-player, or that the genre is inherently multi-player. Most of those adverts have now been pulled while they try and un-fuck the game, but honestly you cannot argue that they were primarily targeting their adverts for a multi-player audience.
11/03/2013 at 17:23 jrodman says:
I challenge you to set up an install of the mangoes server and run the wow client against it.
It runs alright, you can play in wow all by yourself, with not a single other player there, but there is nothing compelling about it. The profound emptiness, the incompleteness of the experience that assumes the presence of other players is clear.
The best parts of the game: dungeons, batltegrounds, raids, are completely inaccessible. The stale mechanics of the world are laid bare when there are no other players participating. Every “rare” thing is standing there in its spawn point. Every town or city has only completely static NPCs with no one to mask them.
It is POSSIBLE to play as a single player game, but it’s a failure. It’s clearly not a single player game at all, and never will be.
11/03/2013 at 17:32 x1501 says:
“It isn’t a multiplayer only game. It is a online only game…You can easily spend 100s of hours on WoW without interacting with other human characters at all.”
What a dumb argument. In WoW, as in most other MMORPGs, you can’t do any of the endgame content solo. Raids, dungeons, Battlegrounds, World Bosses, Arenas, and etc. are simply unavailable to you if you choose to play “without interacting with other human characters at all”. You also wouldn’t be able to access trading, chatting, guilds, group quests, group and guild rewards, and probably a crapload of other events, unlocks and activities by always playing alone. You’re also forgetting the fact that the leveling process is significantly easier today than it used to be back in the vanilla days, when leveling your character without grouping up was a long, monotonous process where you often had to avoid elite mobs altogether because very few classes could even handle fighting them solo.
11/03/2013 at 17:43 Jonesy says:
@Deano2099 “But it’s not broken. It was designed this way. There’s a big difference.”
The game was designed in a way that the people that purchased said game often cannot play it. People still have trouble playing it. So unless someone is playing a different game in which they win by pissing the most people off, then the game is broken.
11/03/2013 at 20:51 Devan says:
@Brun ” How can you be so sure that there wasn’t a sizable group of people out there that expects *all* of their games to be multiplayer?”
You’re making a fallacy. Nobody here is saying that SimCity should have excluded online multiplayer. We are saying that it should have included offline single player, just like every previous game in that franchise.
12/03/2013 at 00:10 GSGregory says:
Here is the issue and difference between sim city and wow. Lets take final fantasy 7 a single player rpg aimed at delivering a narrative via the dialogue and visual/audio experience. Now lets add pointless achievements to the game and force you to always be online to share them. This feature is a gimmick and is not a main component or even a side feature of the gameplay yet the reasoning here is for that you should always have internet to play. This is what ea has done to sim city.
Another point is the fact that ea has a terrible record with keeping games running or online portions of games running so once sim city stops making them large profit they will throw it out without a thought.
Lastly a mmo is designed around multiplayer experiences and features sure you can ignore this however Sim city is a single player game and has always been one and is designed as such the features added to the newest installment are gimmicks and not the main focus of the game. Beyond that I want to play the game I bought whenever or where ever and especially play it how I want to play it not how ea says it should be played.
13/03/2013 at 10:09 Wanoah says:
Except…it’s been what? Ten years since Sim City 4 and literally no one has delivered anything like it. Cities XL looked promising initially, but I found it to be a shallow simulation that fell far short of SC4′s gameplay.
There are large numbers of people that want to play a city builder game, else we wouldn’t be having the current outcry about Sim City, but no one has stepped in to fill that gap in a decade. It looks like a massive missed opportunity to me: if there was serious competition, maybe Sim City wouldn’t have been the complete debacle that it has been.
11/03/2013 at 14:22 aepervius says:
Calling this multi-player is , well a bit exaggerated.
You never interact directly with your other player (yeah you can buy utility or get gifts, but it is only an indirect interaction). They simply made it so that you have an asynchronous interaction between city. They might as well have had random demand/offer from the region and have the same effect. The only multi-player part really is when you do great work. I have done a bit of both, and frankly, you might as well play alone, because there is no real gameplay difference between both.
11/03/2013 at 14:32 Random Gorilla says:
TF2 has an offline mode.
11/03/2013 at 16:33 TechnicalBen says:
And supports lan. AND un-official and player owned servers. In fact, EA allowing players to own servers would fix 99% of this, they could have 1 or so little login servers or use Origin only. They would save money and server costs and allow players to, well, play.
But they would have less control and less DRM with that option.
11/03/2013 at 17:38 Zeewolf says:
On SimCity’s box, it clearly states you can play alone OR with others. You can make a private server, build a bunch of interconnected cities, and get the entire resource-trading experience that way. That function is supported by the game and advertised on the box.
See, this is important. It is called single player, and SimCity supports it. It is not, in any way, shape or form, a multiplayer-only game.
You can argue that the multiplayer is more fun, but that is something else entirely. And you can indeed also argue that the multiplayer would have worked just as well over LAN or on a private server.
11/03/2013 at 23:15 Devan says:
@Zeewolf
You’re right; it’s not a multiplayer-only game. It is, however, an online-only game. And that puts important constraints on its usefulness as a singleplayer game.
11/03/2013 at 23:22 Zeewolf says:
Precisely.
11/03/2013 at 14:14 hbarsquared says:
In perhaps the best marketing move of the year, Tropico 4 is on sale at Steam for 75% off. After my SimCity dreams were crushed in the industrial pulverizer of EA’s profit machine, I soothed my soul with dictatorial aspirations and delightful Caribbean music.
11/03/2013 at 14:39 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Yes. Anyone excited about the idea that citizens are modeled to have jobs and live places, etc… should get Tropico 4 instead. It has one time call home DRM (improvement over Trop3′s always-on-during-startup DRM)
But more relevant it is fun and works well. It does get a bit easy once you’ve seen it all, but it will provide many hours of gameplay for fans of the genre.
11/03/2013 at 15:41 Gargenville says:
Would’ve been better if Tropico 4 didn’t have an online launcher of itself. And Anno 2070 uses uPlay so.. Play Civ V I guess?
edit: oh Tropico 4 only does that once? I reinstalled my junk recently so I guess that’s why it came up.
11/03/2013 at 18:17 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Now I could have it wrong, but I believe Trop3 called home every time you started a game (after that it was offline, though). I don’t think Tropico 4 does this after the first run. Perhaps you can verify.
11/03/2013 at 15:49 Martel says:
It’s funny because I stayed away from Sim City for all the reasons mentioned above, but needed to scratch that itch. So, I have purchased the Tropic 4 pack off Steam for $10 and have already received my money’s worth in just the first day and a half.
11/03/2013 at 17:49 Muzman says:
It’s fitting, as John’s article made me feel like breaking out a Che Guevara shirt.
11/03/2013 at 18:40 LintMan says:
I bought the big Tropico 4 bundle (game+expansion+_DLCs) at a recent Steam sale and have been playing it for a while now (nearly done with the original campaign). I haven’t tried any of the Modern Times expansion content yet. My thoughts so far:
- The game annoyingly makes me log in every time I start it. It’s not a one-time thing as far as I can tell
- Overall, T4 is quite charming. It has a lot more “personality” than the SimCity games.
- It is more “gamey” than “simulationey”, at least for the campaign missions.
- The UI for Tropico 4 is fairly clunky and not nearly as convenient or slick as, say, SimCity 4.
- You place individual buildings, not zones. They don’t change or grow, etc based on city status.
- The building placement feels a bit haphazard or loosey-goosey. Especially for things like farms or ranches, which do not have defined boundaries so it’s unclear how much space you need to optimally allocate for them
- There’s a fixed set of maps, with a generally smallish area. you can build on and a surprisingly large amout of space you cannot build on. (The UI doesn’t really help there).
- The game runs solidly and smoothly. I’ve played dozens of hours without ever seeing any crashes, and the performance is way better than the always-sluggish SimCity 4.
All told, Tropico 4 doesn’t quite scratch the same itch for me that SimCity 4 does, but it’s been quite enjoyable so far.
12/03/2013 at 03:27 DClark says:
With regards to the log in prompt, it’ll prompt you to log in to check for updates only if you have an internet connection – if you don’t have a connection it’ll go right into the game (just pull your internet connection and fire it up to see what it’ll do).
With regards to the housing not changing you’re right, but after I’d played it for a few hours (got the bundle when they started the Steam sale) I noticed it’s the people who change, not the houses. You’ll have uneducated people who need education, and your Ministry needs citizens who are educated and have good ratings in Intelligence, Leadership, and Courage. They also change jobs and even die – one of my Ministers had a heart attack so I had to replace her with another citizen. The facilities you build help to shape the citizens and it’s the citizens who evolve.
I bought the game without intending to play it for a while because I have a huge game backlog, but after firing it up to play through the tutorial I’ve now played it for 13 hours over the weekend.
11/03/2013 at 14:29 jeffty says:
Is he honestly telling me he just found out EA is bad? Stop giving them your money. You are the problem. When pigeons crap all over your outdoor dining area at a restaurant, it doesn’t do any good to blame the pigeons: Blame the people who feed them.
11/03/2013 at 14:45 Ultra Superior says:
Wooot ? Of course you blame the pigeons! It is your dining area leftovers that feeds them.
It is also your private property. Shoot!
11/03/2013 at 15:36 Banana_Republic says:
Clean up after yourself and there are no more pigeons. It’s a question of being responsible for one’s self. Pigeons are dumb. They react to to their environment. People are *supposed to be* intelligent and capable of exercising free will. We can control the environment, thus we can control the pigeons.
EA is dumb too and they react to their environment, or in this case, they react to their market. It’s consumers though, who have the ultimate control. We choose where to spend our money, which will either encourage or discourage the behaviour of companies like EA. It’s a shame that the behaviour we choose to encourage amounts to demanding that EA take a dump where we eat.
Gamers are the problem here. We’re the worst consumers in any market because we have almost no ability to be conscientious in our spending. We see they shiny, we cry for the shiny, we hand over our wallets for the shiny and we never consider anything beyond fulfilling our immediate desires. It’s a behaviour we share with another subset of the population — heroin addicts. No thought of consequences, only personal gratification.
11/03/2013 at 17:09 Brise Bonbons says:
Thing is, massive corporations with the sort of marketing budget EA has to throw around don’t just react mindlessly to consumers; they use ad buys and exclusive interviews and developer diaries (and game mechanics themselves; look at the careful compulsion-loops in social game design) to shape consumer desire into something they can easily supply with high-profit products.
I am not trying to argue that corporations are evil wizards and that we’re all being mind controlled by the corporations. I just don’t think it’s a radical assertion to say that marketing shapes our consumption habits quite significantly.
11/03/2013 at 15:09 Sheng-ji says:
The consumer is not to blame. EA spends millions on manipulating people into buying their game. Don’t blame the people feeding the pigeons, blame the men selling them bread to feed to the pigeons, showing them pictures of a happy family petting a beautiful, disease free pigeon taken by a top photographer.
11/03/2013 at 16:55 dongsweep says:
The world is not this black and white. You cannot just take away all responsibility from the consumer as if EA’s marketing campaign forces us one way or the other, they should share some of the blame. The man selling the bread is the worst offender of the group, but people throwing bread to the pigeons are capable of using rational thought to decide if what they are doing is wise (just like spending money on an always on-DRM game when a person’s personal feelings are very much against them.)
11/03/2013 at 17:14 Sheng-ji says:
Sure, but you can’t expect your average consumer to understand the issues. Sure, we here shouldvknow better, but read the comments – the vast majority of us did not buy it! Until things like always on and DRM are widely understood by the man on the street, you can’t blame people for trusting that the latest sim game will work cos all the others did.
11/03/2013 at 18:08 Droopy The Dog says:
Rational thought only works when people are in full possesion of all the relevant knowledge. I think sheng-ji’s point is EA spends a lot of money and effort on manipulating the information provided to consumers with only partial knowledge of the situation.
[Edit] If we’re sticking with the crazy pigeon analogy, imagine the man selling the bread paid someone to stand a little further down the street handing out fliers with cherry picked statistics about how the pigeons in the area are of a rare endangered species and are starving to death.
And yes it’s possible with a little more digging to get a better view of what’s really happening. Just as it’s also possible to dig into the sustainability of the food we purchase, or the working conditions behind the manufacture of the electronics we purchase, or the biggoted organisations indirectly funded when we purchase entertainment from certain conglomerates. What isn’t possible is to do all of the above. There just isn’t enough time in the day to dig through the omissions or deliberate misinformation behind every purchase we make. Which is why even with everyone trying their best consumers will still end up rewarding irresponsible businesses and apportioning blame solely with consumers and demanding they be the driving force to fix it will not work, not while such business strategies remain nearly ubiquitous.
Something like this on RPS is probably the best you’ll get from consumer action. A trusted source that does most of the legwork behind information hunting for the masses to make being an informed consumer a more realistic option for the average Joe. The problem being trusted sources are the prime target for marketing and even without outside influence no-one is infallible and mistakes will happen, so it’s still far from ideal.
11/03/2013 at 19:25 thrawn says:
Agreed that the world is not black and white, which I think brings up the elephant in the room here. Even with all of this nonsense, if the average consumer doesn’t care and still feels that they get their money’s worth on this game (which most probably will, even if the first week is frustrating), are we really justified in treating it like some massive human rights cause? It’s not an issue of “blame” unless we are somehow entitled to a game; it’s just a issue of varying decisions.
Ultimately entertainment production caters to a variety. It is unfortunate, but the SimCity franchise is, for the time being at least, catering to a market that does not include the RPS audience. I’m not saying we shouldn’t make our complaints heard in the hopes that the next SimCity game might correct these issues, but I just don’t see where treating consumers as if they are at fault or as if they are manipulated idiots avails us anything. If they are happy with their purchase, then the decision was perfectly rational for them… other gamers don’t owe us a thing.
11/03/2013 at 20:04 Lamb Chop says:
The more we can adjust the system to take the onus off of individual consumers and make it borne out. Imagine it weren’t the case that most “organic” labels are lying, that a third of all fish sold in the U.S. is (intentionally) mislabeled, that game services are actually a disservice. Wouldn’t all of our lives be better if we didn’t have to be constantly skeptical? Those responsibilities can be put on the individual by society rather than having regulations or other societal pressures bearing the brunt of it, but that disproportionately affects those with less time and fewer mental reserves to donate to reading up on things. That kind of consumer awareness is a privilege, and even the most privileged still can’t keep up with everything. For instance, I just learned that mountain dew contains a chemical, brominated vegetable oil, that is banned in most first-world countries. It took me years to find that out. What do you think the odds are I would ever have learned that if I were working two jobs, neither of which involves spending time screwing around on the internet? That level of responsibility should be put on the systems that support us, not on the individuals themselves. And consumer advocacy by the privileged should be the vehicle that puts those regulations in place. As informed gamers we have a responsibility to lead the charge.
11/03/2013 at 22:37 Kamos says:
Even the average consumer should be able to see that:
1) Designing a piece of software to include multiple non-essential online features
and
2) Deliberately making it so the whole thing fails as soon as connection is lost and one of the non-essential features fails
is just plain dumb.
The problem is that there is an awful lot of people around here who think you’re an “entitled crybaby” if you expect software you paid for to work.
Essentially, it is now a bad thing if you expect games to be designed by software engineers like every other piece of software on the sane side of the planet, and not by amoral corporate suits who are willing to cheat consumers with crippleware.
edit: for grammar!
11/03/2013 at 20:01 infernalmachine says:
The problem is that while I may not buy EA games, others will mindlessly buy them. We cant fix the problem because there are too many dumb people out there who are willing to put up with these awful practices.
12/03/2013 at 01:42 yrrnn says:
Yes, EA and other large corporations get away with this kind of bad behaviour all of the time.
But are you trying to say that we are only allowed to complain about it the first time it happens, and then simply assume that is going to be standard behaviour from then on?
That is precisely what John is talking about. This kind of crap is slowly becoming the new standard, simply because we are begrudgingly, but silently, putting up with it. We still want to play good games, so we wade through whatever barriers the publisher may throw at us until we get to the juicy core, and it is still sweet, albeit with a bitter after-taste. If we don’t continue to rail against these kinds of actions by publishers every time they do it, and just learn to live with it, it is going to become standard practise because nobody objected, and in many ways this has already happened.
Sure, you say we should vote with our wallets, and that consumers have brought this on ourselves because we still bought the games we wanted to play instead of bravely protesting by not buying them. The kind of people who actually do this and refuse to buy games on principle are very few indeed, and won’t be missed by EA. The mass market isn’t going to do this, and while you can control your own actions, and that’s admirable, you can’t change everybody else. So if you want change (you should), you have to make noise about it instead of just silently depriving EA of your money. That is what John is trying to do.
11/03/2013 at 15:36 cluster says:
I fully agree with this article, and that’s why I won’t support and buy the game even when it’s cheaper.
11/03/2013 at 19:24 LintMan says:
@Ravenholme – Yes, I agree also. Thanks for writing this John. It’s time for some of the gaming press to take a stand. Too many are all too willing to overlook the issue once the in-your-face problems are resolved.
12/03/2013 at 04:51 Arkh says:
I fully agree. Thanks a lot John!
11/03/2013 at 19:53 Ashley_Hoskin says:
my co-worker’s ex-wife makes $83 an hour on the computer. She has been out of work for nine months but last month her check was $17712 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this site… http://zapit.nu/30J
11/03/2013 at 20:45 Ingall says:
But, did she buy SimCity?
11/03/2013 at 22:15 realitysconcierge says:
Hear hear.
11/03/2013 at 23:00 Shadram says:
The baffling thing is that Maxis already did an always-online single-player game properly a few years ago: Spore. Being online meant an infinite amount of customisability, and sharing with your friends, but it still worked when the internet fell over. Sim City should do exactly the same thing.
It’s games like Spore and Dark Souls that should be guiding the always online design decisions of single-player gaming, not this DRM-in-disguise bull shit.
12/03/2013 at 02:34 Mario Figueiredo says:
Spore launched one of the first biggest DRM controversies in gaming history. I do not find it a good example of a successful launch. And I’m surprised you think so after the huge outcry against solutions like SecuROM and limited registrations. For this reason, the game received one of the lowest user scores in modern computer gaming (which SimCity seems about to beat) and was even the target of not one, but two class-action suits.
13/03/2013 at 21:38 cbott85 says:
So I have been doing a lot of reading about the new Sim City because well like most people i was very excited about the release and i wanted to see how it was. So far from what I can see I am better off not buying it.
The online feature really deters me in the fact that I don’t want to always have to be online. If i want to be online to play with friends I would get on, but for the most part i just like building my cities in peace with no internet problems. On top of that i have seen that with the online feature they will be charging us all out the ass for updates, and you will be paying to create bigger cities as well. Ludicrous I tell you! So until I know all the BS that will be coming with this game i think i am just going to buy Sim City 4. The last one i played was 3000 and I really enjoyed that one, Hell I still have it, may just go back to playing the old school ones still fun without the headaches.
But can anyone tell me how Sim City 4 was? I still may buy that one.
13/03/2013 at 21:50 Narzhul says:
SC4 is very good. It gets far more complex than SC3k, and the region mechanics is very nice as well.
I’d say the only thing I disliked was that the UI looks shabby compared to SC3k. It looks more like what you see in The Sims. Also, the advisers doesn’t have much personality like in SC3k; I find myself always ignoring what they say and simply read the short headline instead. Not to mention I miss the portrait-like drawings.
But these are superficial criticisms. Everything else is awesome.
13/03/2013 at 21:48 cbott85 says:
So I have been doing a lot of reading about the new Sim City because well like most people i was very excited about the release and i wanted to see how it was. So far from what I can see I am better off not buying it.
The online feature really deters me in the fact that I don’t want to always have to be online. If i want to be online to play with friends I would get on, but for the most part i just like building my cities in peace with no internet problems. On top of that i have seen that with the online feature they will be charging us all out the ass for updates, and you will be paying to create bigger cities as well. Ludicrous I tell you! So until I know all the BS that will be coming with this game i think i am just going to buy Sim City 4. The last one i played was 3000 and I really enjoyed that one, Hell I still have it, may just go back to playing the old school ones still fun without the headaches.
But can anyone tell me how Sim City 4 was? I still may buy that one.
11/03/2013 at 13:06 Uthred says:
Odd that you give Maxis a pass towards the end when several members of the team have gone on record saying not only were they fine with the always online & multiplayer stuff but also pushed for its inclusion.
11/03/2013 at 13:07 Ravenholme says:
I think the pretty obvious assumption there is that EA is briefing them to say things like that. The looming spectre of PR and all that.
11/03/2013 at 13:11 Uthred says:
EA and Maxis are largley the same entity these days, in fact I think they share corporate headquarters. I just find it odd that gamers are all too quick to publicly excoriate EA (often rightly) while giving Maxis a wink and a nod and a “Oh poor old Maxis, they’re clearing being repressed by their corporate masters”
11/03/2013 at 13:16 Arglebargle says:
The ex Maxis workers I know pretty much spit on the ground when EA gets mentioned. Actually, almost everyone I know who’s ever worked for them does that…..
11/03/2013 at 13:18 diamondmx says:
Perhaps what he should have said was: If Maxis speaks out against this, then they get a pass. If not, then one way or another this is at least as much their fault as EA’s.
But the reason I think Maxis got less abuse in this article is because this is standard EA-fare and it’s got their stink all over it.
11/03/2013 at 13:18 Surlywombat says:
He’s not giving Maxis a free pass, he specifically said the developers at maxis. By which I he means, a guy called Dave. Rather than a developer called Maxis. If you think a developer is top of the heap making decisions like whether or not to have always-on then you are mistaken.
11/03/2013 at 13:19 Danorz says:
this DRM and “community sharing” arsery was going to be in SC4000 too but they couldn’t get it to work then either. they let that actually stop them then though.
11/03/2013 at 13:25 Svant says:
He did not give Maxis a free pass he said that the _developers_ at Maxis should be angry. You know the people who work at Maxis and just want to make the best game they can. The guys who has no say in whether the game is online only or not.
11/03/2013 at 13:32 Uthred says:
What, you mean guys like Ocean Quigley?
11/03/2013 at 13:45 battles_atlas says:
How can you blame anyone called Ocean Quigley for anything?
11/03/2013 at 14:29 Rikard Peterson says:
No Oceans!
(Uhm… wrong campaign?)
11/03/2013 at 14:43 Meusli says:
He has a beard?
11/03/2013 at 14:53 S Jay says:
OCEANFACE
11/03/2013 at 13:34 luukdeman111 says:
Well….. Yeah, obviously. What did you expect? They aren’t going to say; yeah, we think drm is a stupid idea because of server crashes on launch but pre-order our game anyways!
11/03/2013 at 14:47 Uthred says:
Sure, none of the developers have mentioned stuff like this even before the announcement of SC5, no siree, theyre just brain washed cogs in EA’s PR machine!
11/03/2013 at 15:41 Banana_Republic says:
EA owns Maxis, which means Maxis is basically EA’s sock puppet. Maxis may mouth the words, but it’s EA who’s talking.
11/03/2013 at 13:07 applecado says:
Agree entirely. I like the game, and it is easier to actually play now, but there’s nothing I’ve done in game yet that has actually made use of any of the multiplayer-only stuff – in fact, I’ve only had bugs with it – I sent another town in my region some cash and it just vanished from both cities. Fun.
I still play SC4.. and I think I’ll go back to that once I’m bored with this new one.. or in 5 years when I want to play it and they’ve shut the servers down.
11/03/2013 at 14:04 Rich says:
“I sent another town in my region some cash and it just vanished from both cities.”
Wow. You mean it actually simulates real-world bank system failures? What an age we live in!
11/03/2013 at 13:08 Blackseraph says:
Hear hear.
People shouldn’t buy these games, only way to stop this.
11/03/2013 at 13:17 sleepisthebrotherofdeath says:
This.
Don’t buy it. Simple.
If they remove the DRM then buy it, otherwise do without.
Anybody who pre-ordered this knowing it had always on DRM learn and don’t pre-order in the future.
11/03/2013 at 13:47 albert2006xp says:
Maybe I actually want to play this with my group of friends? Maybe I wouldn’t actually buy this if I couldn’t play with my friends?
11/03/2013 at 13:59 Blackseraph says:
Since you can’t obviously develop games so that both single player without internet and multiplayer in internet are possible?
Is that really your argument?
11/03/2013 at 14:10 albert2006xp says:
No that’s not it. Just saying I’m not gonna pass on a fun game with my friends to protest this minor issue.
11/03/2013 at 14:55 S Jay says:
Minor issue?
11/03/2013 at 17:32 jrodman says:
“I don’t want any rights, if I might have some fun one time.”
12/03/2013 at 01:16 Kamos says:
Consider a car that has router in it and is connected to the internet.
Would it be a “minor issue” if your car went dead in a country road because it lost its connection to the internet? Yes? No?
“Oh, but games are games! And cars are cars! It doesn’t make sense!”
Glad you think so, too! Yes, obviously games are entertainment, and not as important as, say, potentially using your car in an emergency. However, the question here is that both the game and the car have been deliberately crippled by creating an artificial requirement for an internet connection.
Is it a minor issue that EA counts on you being a naive, bumbling fool, willing to buy software that is sub-par because you’re willing to behave like a drug addict to play a game?
11/03/2013 at 13:22 The First Door says:
Yes, but this assumes some people don’t actually want the game. The problem is that other people have different opinions and actually might want the feature you hate.
Don’t get me wrong, in this case I entirely agree and I’m not buying SimCity, but I’m not going to look down on my friend who bought it because he wanted to play the online stuff.
11/03/2013 at 15:10 lordcooper says:
There is a difference between having online features and jamming them down everybody’s throats. I love Sim City games, but won’t be touching this one with a bargepole.
11/03/2013 at 13:08 MOKKA says:
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
11/03/2013 at 13:10 Jams O'Donnell says:
“like claiming a broken leg fixed because you’ve mended the crutches.”
Great analogy. Would read again. 4*
11/03/2013 at 14:10 LTK says:
And then EA tells you how great it is to have a broken leg because your friends can sign their names on the cast!
11/03/2013 at 14:34 c-Row says:
And for an additional $10 you can buy some new friends, too!
11/03/2013 at 14:56 mr.ioes says:
For 20$, they break your other leg – more space for your friends’ signatures.
11/03/2013 at 15:49 lijenstina says:
For 20$ you’ll get your severed leg back to sign as a receipt after buying a new brain. Dunno what you’ll get with the Bertrand Russell Super Silver though.
11/03/2013 at 13:10 Brosepholis says:
Thought I was reading Erik Kain there for a moment.
11/03/2013 at 13:10 Rao Dao Zao says:
I agree forever. A colleague of mine just eschewed SimCity 5 and bought SimCity 2000… Oops!
11/03/2013 at 14:13 LionsPhil says:
Full points to Good Old Games for this one.
11/03/2013 at 13:10 SuperNashwanPower says:
Doubleplus good article
11/03/2013 at 13:12 Maxheadroom says:
Like many people I didnt buy it because of all the DRM shite. But if articles like this dont make a difference (which it wont) What chance does little me have of changing their mind by witholding my pennies?
They’re already spinning it as a success by saying they wern’t prepared for just how super popular it is
11/03/2013 at 13:19 mrmalodor says:
Difference isn’t made in one day or one article. One day you will grow up and come to realize this.
11/03/2013 at 13:31 Maxheadroom says:
My, that was a bit tetchy wasnt it?
Would you like me to list the dozens of other articles that say much the same thing? Then wait a few months and re-make my point about no differences being made?
My point was EA are too big to care about public opinion, whether they’re being called out by professional journalists or the screaming masses. I’m not quite sure who you’re defending
11/03/2013 at 13:48 battles_atlas says:
You could do that Max but you’d be wrong, so probably best not to. Defeatist cynicism is not sophisticated, its just self-destructive. Ubisoft weren’t too big to be taught a lesson. Neither is EA.
11/03/2013 at 14:00 Maxheadroom says:
OK thats a fair point I guess, I am a bit of a cynic.
I find that way I can only ever be pleasantly surprised :)
11/03/2013 at 14:48 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Ubisoft is a good point, and at least one precendent to point to. When this shit happens, be stingy, bitch, and then keep bitching, be stingy with next release, bitch more = Ubisoft is practically DRM free…
11/03/2013 at 23:01 Kamos says:
We have logic on our side. EA has disinformation and people who honestly don’t give a fuck.
This shouldn’t be a difficult battle as long as we get the logic part right.
11/03/2013 at 14:00 phlebas says:
You’re right that your pennies won’t make a difference, the same way your vote individually is unlikely to swing a general election. But your pennies and my pennies and John’s pennies and sufficiently many other people’s pennies can add up to enough pennies to make a difference to a company driven by bean-counters.
11/03/2013 at 14:10 dongsweep says:
And then EA will blame everyone but themselves for the lack of success. They will shelve SimCity and think “see, no one wants these types of games anymore” when in actuality it is their arrogance that no one wants. Look at Dead Space 4. Cancelled because of their shit decisions in Dead Space 3.
11/03/2013 at 17:17 Hahaha says:
What about SC2?
What about D3?
What about SimCity5?
*This post is future proof*
11/03/2013 at 13:25 diamondmx says:
Yeah, putting another +1 in this column, I have a decent internet connection, I bought the last SC and thought this looked like fun. In short, this game would have worked fine and I am a potential customer.
Didn’t buy it because this DRM crap has to stop.
It’s also the reason the only Ubisoft games I’ve bought lately have been because I didn’t realise they were Ubisoft until the bloody UPlay thing started installing.
These things actively lose them a lot of money and goodwill, and even if they do prevent piracy (which this new cripple-ware style of game might), it’s a temporary victory that will not last.
11/03/2013 at 14:24 Axyl says:
Exactly the same thing you said applies to me.
This is me +1ing :)
11/03/2013 at 14:26 Optimaximal says:
UPlay isn’t always-on DRM any more (apart from a few low-selling games they won’t patch it out of).
Yes, it’s ‘another launcher’, but it’s not a background tool or anything – it’s wrapped up with the games that use it, so you can safely ignore it.
11/03/2013 at 14:31 Brun says:
Ubisoft has done a great deal recently towards mending their reputation with PC players, including removing always-on DRM from their games. As such I decided to reward them with a purchase of Far Cry 3 last year.
11/03/2013 at 13:35 Lemming says:
I loved SimCity 2k (not played one since this one came out, now I’m playing SimCity 3k and Tropico 4) I’m on a fibre connection paid for by my work, I still didn’t buy it. I know a lemon when I see one.
11/03/2013 at 13:42 Jools says:
Yeah, a big part of the problem here is that there’s very little consumer advocacy going on in the gaming industry. Consumers (of any product) can’t really be trusted to make informed decisions and guide the direction an industry moves in because there’s simply too much stuff out there for every person to be informed about every little thing. Informed consumers are too small a minority to make a difference, so we’re pretty much all left feeling helpless in the face of publishers and developers that are entirely happy to behave in ways that are clearly anti-consumer.
11/03/2013 at 15:33 diamondmx says:
There’s also a serious, if probably unfixable problem in that every game is an effective mini-monopoly. Or at least any games of any quality.
You can reasonably say that getting your phone service from BT or Virgin doesn’t matter because it is, for the most part, the exact same thing – they compete on services and prices and not being shitty to the customer. The same is true of most consumer goods, one hoover is the mostly same as another, one TV is mostly the same as another.
One game, even in the same genre is quite significantly different, and if it is in fact a standout example of that genre, then there is no other game that gives you a significantly similar experience. Half Life is not Halo is not Call of Duty, even in that genre frequently derided for being samey. Starcraft is really not C&C, Thief is not Dishonoured, etc. If you want the experience provided by Sim City, you have to buy Sim City.
The more crowded a genre is, the less true this becomes, but in many cases, someone deciding not to purchase a game because of an ancillary problem like DRM, customer service, bad previous experience – is not choosing not to purchase a thing from Company A, or EA in this case, but to not purchase that thing at all.
11/03/2013 at 13:13 sarbian says:
The “some of its computations are server-side” is pure BS. Friday night I managed to log in my city and I played for hours with the “disconected from server” message staying all the time in the upper left corner.
I could play fine. Maybe some feture(selling ore, coal, … to the global market) didn’t work, but everything else did.
11/03/2013 at 13:13 Danorz says:
In mega-city one, back pain accounted for something like a 20% loss in worker productivity. this, the judges reasoned, was mirrored in crime figures too. so they banned back pain medication. That’s EA and this DRM.
11/03/2013 at 18:51 Barlk says:
Comment of the decade?
11/03/2013 at 13:14 bstard says:
One of the best reads on RPS so far.
11/03/2013 at 13:14 psaldorn says:
I’d say their strategy is a success. I for one will not be attempting to pirate SimCity.
I also will not be paying for it.
Pyrrhic victory, perhaps.
Instead I backed Civitas: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1584821767/civitas-plan-develop-and-manage-the-city-of-your-d
11/03/2013 at 13:44 AngoraFish says:
Dude, Civitas is an illusion built on a mirage. Anyone who tells you they can make a decent SimCity game that can also run on Android for only $250,000 is tugging your chain. If you’re kicking in for Civitas you’re living the same dream that hundreds of thousands of SimCity preorder customers are living on.
11/03/2013 at 14:14 Sheng-ji says:
Even if they release the engine as is, the thousands of highly experienced and talented modders with an interest in this game will have it up and running in 6 months flat. I’m much more prepared to take a punt on their game just to tell EA to fuck off.
11/03/2013 at 14:54 Sparkasaurusmex says:
They’re going to put it on Android?
*checks link to see if worth backing*
11/03/2013 at 20:50 AngoraFish says:
We have been in talks with one of the creators of the OUYA … and they helped us get all setup for developing on the OUYA. We will try our best to make this happen!
OUYA runs on Android.
11/03/2013 at 15:08 mr.ioes says:
Dude, Civitas is a scam most likely.
reddit link
11/03/2013 at 13:15 MuscleHorse says:
I want to play this but I simply won’t pay for it until the DRM is stripped from it. I’m fairly easy going with most forms of DRM, but this is getting ridiculous.
11/03/2013 at 13:15 Arglebargle says:
Checking up on their lists, apparantly I haven’t gotten an EA game since Dragon Age: Origins. It looks like this good streak will definitely continue.
11/03/2013 at 14:16 Sheng-ji says:
Oooh, same here! Will DA:O be remembered as the last good game EA didn’t ruin?
12/03/2013 at 03:58 Arglebargle says:
Technically, I think Dragon Age was under development before the buyout, but EA didn’t then totally gut it. Thank goodness. For that, we had to wait til Dragon Age 2. Hell, if they’d even positioned it as a side adventure in the DA universe, instead of a sequel they’d have done better by it.
11/03/2013 at 13:18 Merus says:
I would suggest it would be a neat trick indeed for companies that want to use pervasive metrics for game balance purposes to do that with everyone offline. Because that’s really what’s driving this – the DRM is a nice side-benefit, but the rabbit in the headlights look these developers put on when the complaints start and the servers fall over suggests that they’re not thinking of this as DRM, because otherwise they’d have a PR person at the ready to explain the difficulties of building games for PCs and piracy and blah blah blah. Instead they start to explain how they’re logging everything players do to see how it breaks, and they get halfway and realise they have no idea how it’s actually going to work until it’s running and so they just trail off. It’s just too incompetent for DRM to be the primary driver here.
I also note that no-one rages at Failbetter Games for their always-online text adventures, Fallen London and its ilk. Or Realm of the Mad God, which could easily have an offline mode.
It feels to me like AAA developers see what indies are able to do with their always-online games and want to replicate that, but forget they are in very different markets indeed. Always-online titles grow their userbase slowly, by word of mouth, so they’re never overwhelmed by demand and network effects keep the game healthy. AAA titles sell in a massive spike, and then the userbase slowly dwindles. Making a hit-driven always-online game unavoidably results in a launch day disaster – basically no-one can manage the rush of users when a AAA title launches, even for something as simple as an unlock code from Steam.
11/03/2013 at 13:29 Surlywombat says:
Wow.. mind blown. That was like reading Meet the Pryro. It must be nice to live in your world.
11/03/2013 at 13:38 googoogjoob says:
i actually laughed at this thank you
11/03/2013 at 13:53 karthink says:
The indie games you mentioned are all free to play.
11/03/2013 at 14:25 derbefrier says:
how is that relevant? Are you saying in certain cases always on is acceptable? make up your mind it either is or it isn’t. Its okay as long is the game is free? so you would be perfectly fine with Sim City if this was a F2P game with literally no difference expect a micro transaction store? Either your fine with DRM and you enjoy steam and MMOs and all the other games out there that requirean online connection or its horrible and destroying our hobby you have to pick one not both or your just another hypocrite that no one will take seriously.
This is the reason all the crying will change nothing. you all hate DRM yet every single one of you has a steam account. You all play F2P games that are always on like DOTA 2, LoL, etc…. actions speak louder than words and your actions are screaming that online DRM is perfectly acceptable. This goes for just about everyone. If you have a steam account your condoning the use of DRM if you play an online F2P game you accept the use of always on DRM. This is why nothing will change because you don’t practice what you preach.
11/03/2013 at 14:30 Hahaha says:
amen
11/03/2013 at 14:52 Sheng-ji says:
A free game makes it’s money from microtransactions.
A full priced game makes money from the customer purchase.
A free game will often manipulate the player in to making a microtransaction – usually by making advanced elements of the game available only through a purchase, making the game more convenient through a purchase, reducing a long and boring grind through a purchase or by making more powerful game elements available only through a purchase.
This is acceptable in a free game because you can choose your level of commitment. Plenty of players literally never pay for a lot of fun. Some players pay a pittance for hours of fun. Very few pay more than a full price release.
If you have already had to purchase the game, the game should be an enjoyable and complete experience free from the above manipulations.
That is all.
11/03/2013 at 15:02 Sparkasaurusmex says:
It’s been said a million times and I feel cliche repeating, but for your information Steam is not an Always-On DRM. The big point of contention here is the Always-On part.
Personally DRM sucks, blanket rule. But this argument isn’t about DRM in all it’s forms, it’s the Always-On DRM that is annoying.
We went through all of this with Ubisoft recently, remember? Also, we won.
11/03/2013 at 15:03 Hahaha says:
Hows the error go?
“no login details saved on this computer you can’t start steam in offline mode”
something like that
11/03/2013 at 17:03 Milky1985 says:
“Hows the error go?
“no login details saved on this computer you can’t start steam in offline mode”
something like that”
So you sign in, log out, disconnect your computer then amazingly when you fire it up next within the next 30 days you sign in OK, only in opposite land is this the same as always online DRM.
So its not always online, of course either you already knew this and are just trolling, or you didn’t and are just a little bit thick.
So go on, shoo back to your anti steam cave.
11/03/2013 at 18:02 jrodman says:
I can confirm that when my internet failed for 2 weeks, steam offline mode worked for precisely 30 hours.
That is, less than 1.5 days after no-internet, it decided not to offer offline mode anymore. Offline mode did not operate at any time in the remaining 12.5 or so days of no-internet. It was sort of a blessing though, as my GOG back-catalog of downloaded games needed attention.
It doesn’t really require malfeasance for Steam offline to be a mirage, it only requires the endless parade of bugs in Steam.
11/03/2013 at 23:08 Kamos says:
It is incredible how poor Steam is, considering the amount of money that goes in it. It is another effect of this new wave of gamers who behave like drug addicts willing to endure anything for their fix.
11/03/2013 at 17:09 solidsquid says:
The games you mentioned are all explicitly multiplayer games, where the multiplayer aspect is a core part of the gameplay. SimCity is a single player game which has some small inter-city game mechanics added in to create a more social aspect. If you removed the multiplayer from either Realm of the Mad God or Fallen London then you’d have a very different game. If you removed it from Sim City then… well, you’d have Sim City, the whole game would still operate just fine without those features as it is if they just put random numbers in for things like tourism
11/03/2013 at 13:18 AngoraFish says:
It’s always amazed me, given the abortion that was CitiesXL, that EA nonetheless proceeded on exactly the same path for exactly the same reasons… and, as is now clear, improved on absolutely nothing in the process.
Thank god I learned my own lesson the first time, so one less sale from me. Not that it seems to have made any difference, given that sales have been going through the roof by all accounts.
11/03/2013 at 13:18 albert2006xp says:
Oh boo freaking hoo. I’m sick of all this bashing of always online. Maybe you want to play single player but I don’t, I play games only online and with friends. Why should I care in the rare occasion once a year my internet is down for 1 hour? If they want the game to be online permanently you should take it as a mmo. I don’t see you bashing WoW for not being able to play on a plane.
As a student and future game developer I tell you, no multiplayer, no money from me. I don’t have money to pay for a single player experience of a couple hours til im sick of it, I want a multiplayer option that will last longer and feel like I didn’t throw money out the window. I wouldve just pirated this if it wasn’t online and probably stopped playing after max 10 hours. Which is not what I want out of a game. I don’t even bother pirating single player games, cause its not even worth the download time.
11/03/2013 at 13:20 Danorz says:
“fuck you, got mine”
11/03/2013 at 13:42 dongsweep says:
Couldn’t have summarized his post any better myself. What a fool.
11/03/2013 at 13:22 Brosepholis says:
You would do well to watch your tongue, sir. As stated in the article, any disagreement with the accepted viewpoint means you are into self-flagellation and probably a paid EA shill (which Reddit assures me is a common practice)
11/03/2013 at 14:18 Giuseppe says:
Paid by EA? Surely his “arguments” are too daft to come from someone who’s actually paid for this?!
11/03/2013 at 13:23 caddyB says:
Keep turfing, brotha!
11/03/2013 at 13:24 scardb says:
Do you boohoo everyone who is frustrated with something you don’t care about at all? Oh this person cares about something that I do not, they must be whinging babies – it’s the only possible answer!
11/03/2013 at 13:26 caddyB says:
I would pin a medal to your chest so hard you’d die of blood loss.
11/03/2013 at 13:32 albert2006xp says:
Pretty much sick of the score bashing going on this game JUST because of the server stuff. You never see that in a MMO. Only because the other games of the series were singleplayer doesn’t make this one THE SAME THING.
Why do they focus on something that doesn’t bother anyone expect pirates. You have internet to complain on it about the game, so whats the problem?
I’d be more upset about the day one DLC stuff that’s op like the Deluxe Edition german/italian/french packs. THAT’s a real issue. Not the need for internet.
11/03/2013 at 14:08 Julio Biason says:
If it’s not the same thing, why call it the same thing?
It’s like making “Avengers 2″ about a group of women that go shopping around New York and talking about their sexual lifes…
Also, they made the servers part of the game. If the servers don’t work, the game doesn’t work. Shouldn’t a game that doesn’t work receive bad ratings?
(Also, there was a game that launched with severe problems with NVidia drivers, but worked flawlessly with AMD/ATI drivers — can’t really remember the name. Should it be prized for anything if didn’t work in most machines today?)
11/03/2013 at 14:16 albert2006xp says:
No, shoddy launches are expected in online games. They always happen. You shouldn’t judge the game on that.
11/03/2013 at 14:35 Julio Biason says:
So you’re saying that we should expect things to be crap at launch? Is that what we want from games? “Meh, it’s crap, but that’s ok”? What fucked up world that is.
Btw, I was there in the Guild Wars 2 launch. It wasn’t shoddy at all. And it *is* an online game.
11/03/2013 at 17:14 solidsquid says:
If an MMORPG launched without any mobs spawning and with weapons all only doing 1 damage, regardless of what the specs said, you would judge the game based on that. They might fix it later, but it would still be a black mark on the game. Similarly, if the next Call of Duty had weapons which would glitch and provide invulnerability due to a bug then you would judge the game for that, even after they fixed it.
Similarly, when the servers are an intrinsic part of the game and they don’t work on launch then you’re going to judge the game based on that, even after they fix it. Especially since they *haven’t* fixed it yet
11/03/2013 at 14:50 Dark Nexus says:
There certainly are people other than pirates who are bothered by this.
11/03/2013 at 15:05 Sparkasaurusmex says:
haha exactly.
If only pirates were bothered there wouldn’t be this article or comment thread
11/03/2013 at 18:13 jrodman says:
“Oh no, someone has a legitimate grievance with something that I happen to like. I must apologize as hard as I can until this situation stops!”
11/03/2013 at 13:25 Chalky says:
You don’t want the single player aspect, so the fact that the single player aspect is a fundamental clusterfuck fueled by greed and disregard for their customers is acceptable?
You’re a bit of a twat.
11/03/2013 at 13:27 SkittleDiddler says:
Because of assholes like you, the rest of us are stuck with tacked-on multiplayer sections in games that don’t need them, thereby driving the quality of the single-player experience down. Thanks a bunch.
11/03/2013 at 14:31 analydilatedcorporatestyle says:
He’s going to be a games developer don’t you know. He will put this post on his CV under the ‘Look I’m a myopic arsehole’ section. His views will hit the corporate brief, that’s for sure, a AAA developer legend in the making. Call the police an oxygen theft is in process…….
11/03/2013 at 13:28 Skabooga says:
Maybe you want to play multiplayer, but I do not. It would be nice if there was an option we could toggle to serve both our desires.
11/03/2013 at 13:33 albert2006xp says:
There is, its called private region. You have internet to complain about it, so you can play it.
11/03/2013 at 13:36 caddyB says:
Yeah because it takes hours and hours of stable internet connection to post on a comment thread.
No, try again.
11/03/2013 at 13:37 albert2006xp says:
Have really bad internet that works half the time? There are other games for you other there. Do you complain on LoL or WoW forums about this too?
11/03/2013 at 14:19 Sheng-ji says:
From the sounds of it, it’s not the players internet connections that is the problem, it’s the damn servers. I’m guessing this guy will rue his words the first time their servers forget the last 2 hours of play he’s put in which people are making a convincing argument to being unconnected to server load but an entirely separate bug in their server side software.
11/03/2013 at 18:37 jrodman says:
Because depending upon as many potentially unreliable things as possible is good engineering. RIght, Mr Designer?
What about a computer that doesn’t work during nighttime? The sun is reliable! Is your sun half-assed? What did you do wrong to have such a lousy sun?
What about a toothbrush that doesn’t work when the air pressure is unusually low! It’s more efficient! They save money! I happen to *like* high pressure toothbrushing! You people who live at high altitudes are backwards!
11/03/2013 at 23:16 Kamos says:
Have really bad internet that works half the time? There are other games for you other there. Do you complain on LoL or WoW forums about this too?
Probably not, since those games are designed to be robust, to minimize effects of latency and endure packet loss, and not a piece of crippleware designed with artificial connection requirements and an artificial need to crash as soon as the connection fails.
Your examples make no sense.
See, this is why we don’t call children to design rockets that go out into space. It takes 1) people who actually know what they are doing and 2) amazingly, you need to design it to go into outer space. It doesn’t work if you aim it into the ground, like EA did.
11/03/2013 at 14:54 Dark Nexus says:
Having to rely on multiple corporate entities to do things properly so I can play a game in single player is unacceptable. It’s adding multiple points of failures that weren’t there before.
12/03/2013 at 16:51 Catastrophe says:
albert, is your name reference to the year you were born by any chance?
11/03/2013 at 13:37 RaveTurned says:
You do realise that the previous incarnations of SimCity were the type of freeform sandboxy game that you could pour literally days of playtime into, right? Despite being entirely single-player? Just checking.
11/03/2013 at 13:39 Terragot says:
Because this is bigger than just “can I play now by myself or with others?” This is a time limited product, it relys on servers. Once EA turns off their servers in 2-3 years, goodbye SimCity, the game ceases to exist. It’s this attitude which puts so little value into what we make, that goes to cement games as a folly, rather than a referencable artform. It also contributes to the shitty conditions we have during development, farting out the same iteration of a game year on year.
I hate it’s reference, but there’s no Citizen Kane of games because games because no one puts value into the damn shit they want to ship.
11/03/2013 at 14:01 Hahaha says:
These companies are pushing out mainstream games WTF did you think was going to happen? the time for action was when the shift started to happen but all of you were to stuck dreaming about something that was never going to happen.
12/03/2013 at 17:02 Catastrophe says:
What? From your terrible sentence structure and equally terrible logic I think you’re trying to suggest Mainstream games told Terragot that he was going to have to suffer from terrible DRM because he had a dream where he wouldn’t suffer from terrible DRM and therefore decided not to act against mainstream games.
Which as you can see, makes no sense at all.
Maybe your sentence was in a cypher I couldn’t decode?
11/03/2013 at 13:44 John Mirra says:
Wow, it really sucks to be you. With that attitude I doubt you can be the ‘future game developer’. Unless you count facebook farmvilles as games.
11/03/2013 at 13:45 Vesuvius says:
Yes yes we get it- you hate plot, you hate well-crafted and guided experiences, and you like being ripped off. The idea of being able to roll-back things to try over, to have permutations on a city is obscene to you, as is the idea of empowering folks to mod their game. I can see where you’re coming from, especially with the mod-hate, given how you say you want to be a game developer one day. I mean, what aspiring content-creator would even want to be able to tinker with various systems and make something new that they could enjoy and share.
I also get that yeah, multiplayer offers SO MUCH to a guy like you. I mean, since you’re a sucker for gaming experiences that allow you to troll others online and be an asshole, rather than having to deal with the existential horror of a single player game. In single player you might be forced to sit with the horror of your own company for an hour or two! Who can blame you for avoiding it.
Out of this entire beautiful manifesto however, I most especially enjoyed the admission that if it weren’t for always-online requirements that you’d just pirate pretty much every game. It’s refreshing for someone as caustic as yourself to at least admit that you lack any conviction to support any developer unless you’re being absolutely forced to.
I’m curious what sort of games you’re thinking about making some day, given your total lack of interest in supporting developers, tinkering with existing games, or even participating in a debate about the merit of design choices and the way they alienate parts of the community. I’m sure your devil-may-care attitude of “boo hoo to all the losers who don’t share my opinion” will create something magical that we’ll all delight in experiencing.
Be sure to let me know when your game comes out so I can pirate it, okay? Thanks!
Your pal,
Vesuvius
11/03/2013 at 13:59 battles_atlas says:
“In single player you might be forced to sit with the horror of your own company for an hour or two!”
Nailed it.
11/03/2013 at 16:53 TechnicalBen says:
Perhaps he will make something like Fez or Gratuitous Space Battles?
(Rider to those comments, I hope those developers are nice people, but they do say nasty things to their paying customers at times. :( )
11/03/2013 at 18:41 jrodman says:
Ehhh.. Cliffski? Maybe I missed it, but everything I’ve read on his blog seems pretty transparent and honest. Blunt maybe at times? I’ve never seen anything nasty.
11/03/2013 at 19:42 MentatYP says:
Poetic burn, perfectly stated.
11/03/2013 at 13:48 Sanderoth says:
Wow, rarely do I see such stupid, egotistical nonsense but you sir take the biscuit on this one.
11/03/2013 at 13:55 Thermal Ions says:
A prospective future game developer advocating piracy. The comments here get stranger and stranger every year.
11/03/2013 at 13:57 battles_atlas says:
For someone that demands social interaction you manage to sound incredibly self-obsessed.
I think there were thirteen “I” in that post, but I lost count towards the end.
11/03/2013 at 13:57 karthink says:
You’re like the opposite of Batman.
11/03/2013 at 14:54 Patches the Hyena says:
That hurt me. Damn!
11/03/2013 at 14:01 Julio Biason says:
It’s a matter of making multiplayer where multiplayer makes sense.
MMORPGs are designed from a perspective of having some people taking a shitload of damage, some people recovering the heal of those taking a shitload of damage and some people doing a shitload of damage. Everything is build with that in mind. If you build a single player RPG, things need to be worked out completely different, ’cause you won’t have some people doing each specific task (you have a single guy that must do everything).
FPSes these days also take that in account, although I will always recommend someone to play Spec Ops: The Line as a single player campaign due its story. Sure, it’s somewhat short, but HECK, it’s an awesome story and, by its own content, pays the whole game, without multiplayer. Same goes to Assassin’s Creed 2: Brotherhood, although the multiplayer is too damn fun.
But a simulation game, in which you can build all the types of cities in a plot and progress all them without the need of a helping hand begs the question: Why there is multiplayer in this? And that’s the core of the question about SimCity and it’s multiplayer: It doesn’t make sense. It could be a well thought multiplayer, one where the player can’t win by themselves, but that’s not the case. The game is thought as a single player game and covered irrationally with multiplayer.
You said you want to be a game developer. Well, that’s something to learn with: Don’t design a game where a single player can win by themselves and then add a requirement for online when there is no need for such thing in your game design.
11/03/2013 at 15:09 Brun says:
So no one is allowed to do an experiment in bringing multiplayer to the simulation genre? The whole notion of “well, games from genre X and Y are designed as multiplayer games from the start, so it’s okay there!” is ridiculous. It implies that nothing about any genre can change. How stagnant.
11/03/2013 at 16:12 Julio Biason says:
No dammit, read it again.
If I start designing a game thinking “this can be beaten by a single person” and then shove multiplayer in it, it will suck. If I start a game — *any* type of game — with multiplayer in mind, it may not suck.
For *ages* FPSes were single player games. Now they are designed from ground up to be multiplayer. That works fine. Same with RPGs and MMORPGs.
Maybe next time I should use smaller words…
12/03/2013 at 17:09 Catastrophe says:
Brun, way to miss the point.
11/03/2013 at 14:02 Julio Biason says:
Also, just adding: I logged 200 hours in Skyrim. It *is* a single player game, designed to be a single player game. I don’t need to be online to play it.
11/03/2013 at 14:20 Cooper says:
Wait,
You have friends?
11/03/2013 at 19:31 Mephz says:
shocking!
11/03/2013 at 14:52 Wisq says:
Because the only way to implement multiplayer is to make it always-online and reliant on some heavily loaded central servers.
Because there’s no such thing as peer-to-peer multiplayer, or dedicated player-run servers, or LAN gameplay.
Because you have a stable internet connection, so obviously the rest of the world does, and doesn’t need offline singleplayer.
Because people on airplanes without wifi service can just read a book instead.
Keep those blinders on, man. Ignorance is bliss.
11/03/2013 at 16:15 tobias says:
Guys, relax, you are arguing with what appears to be a moderately eloquent seven year old. Just tousle his hair and laugh sympathetically at his precocious, yet misguided spoutings.
11/03/2013 at 23:10 Kamos says:
“As a student and future game developer I tell you”
Please provide us your name, so we don’t need to hire you in any sane company where software follows standards and is actually designed to work. Thank you.
“No, shoddy launches are expected in online games. They always happen. You shouldn’t judge the game on that.”
As above. Please understand, it is nothing personal, but I’m thankful you won’t be going anywhere near anything critical.
11/03/2013 at 13:19 Smuggins says:
Good article. Spot on.
11/03/2013 at 13:19 bigjig says:
I just wonder what will happen a year or two from now when EA decide to come out with SimCity 2014 Edition and shut down the servers for this game
11/03/2013 at 13:19 Fyce says:
I find this game really difficult and not enjoyable when played alone.
If no one joins your region, if you are the only mayor on your 2×2 km square, you won’t be able to do everything you want. The size of the map and the specialization system are designed to limit you in such ways that you just can’t do well alone.
Since I started playing it, I was forced to abandon two cities because I had nobody near them to interact with.
This experience makes me belive that the multiplayer isn’t a “bonus” or a “little addition”. It’s a core mechanic.
Thus, I don’t care of the always-on state of things. It’s not a single player game.
11/03/2013 at 13:31 Lanfranc says:
Couldn’t you just start some more cities in the same region yourself to specialise in the other things you need?
11/03/2013 at 14:23 Sheng-ji says:
How much does that not sound like fun! Reminds me of the guy who sets up two computers next to each other and plays turn based MP games against himself
11/03/2013 at 14:25 Hahaha says:
So what you would have to do if it was offline……
11/03/2013 at 14:32 Sheng-ji says:
I guess just have one big city which is always running all parts of it, not a sprinkling of small towns which stop running when you go to another one and whose interactivity is both forced and shallow at best.
11/03/2013 at 14:31 aepervius says:
I can’t speak for the OP but I tried that, and since once you leave a city to run the other , the first stops evolving, and vice versa, making it a very sharded broken experience.
11/03/2013 at 15:18 UberMonkey says:
I’d be okay with that aspect, knowing that it’s basically a limit of the agent-based simulation (whether that was a good idea or not is another topic), if the game allowed you to keep multiple cities pre-loaded into RAM so you could swap without a full load screen. If I could instantly pop back and forth between 2 or 3 cities I think it would feel more like I was actually controlling a region, instead of playing 3 different saved games that happen to vaguely influence each other.
If the cities you’re not playing could run a sort of low-resolution simulation in the background (probably an option you can toggle at the region level) this would be even better. And it would somewhat justify the server architecture, as the server could run these low-detail background sims and save your CPU a bit of hassle.
11/03/2013 at 16:59 TechnicalBen says:
Fixed instantly by making things cost half as much or giving twice as much cash income. Or you know, having larger cities.
The speed and balance of the game is entirely structured on the multiplier to the income or expenditure. Tot he rate of fire or illness. To the rate of happiness or crime. These are simple”variables” in the computer, probably listed in an encrypted (we don’t want modding, no no no) notpad file. So setting a SP mode for this game would be very simple. While not without effort, it would not cost millions to develop.
12/03/2013 at 17:16 Catastrophe says:
So what you’re saying is the Singleplayer doesn’t work properly so people should be fine with having to play it online and Multiplayer? Do people actually THINK about what they’re conveying?!
11/03/2013 at 13:22 gingerpembers says:
Bang on Sir.
So good to hear a respectable outlet slamming this game with the same vitriol I feel.
11/03/2013 at 13:22 Sander Bos says:
From what I’ve read it’s apparently not just a great but a fantastic game for people into the genre (not me), so it will probably still become a huge seller for them.
Boycotts don’t really work if people really want the product in the end.
Game publishers are also looking to kill not just piracy but also the second hand game market, and this scheme to run most of the game code on the client but a relevant part on the server actually seems technically like a very smart way to do it (more scalable than the onlive way for sure, more secure than just a key check or some cloud storage of save games).
So even though this first experiment is a huge failure I don’t think it will be going away.
11/03/2013 at 13:27 mrmalodor says:
Remember Ubisoft?
11/03/2013 at 13:24 bill says:
People will always defend what they have paid for, otherwise they feel like idiots.
I assume EA is doing this as much for blocking 2nd hand sales and for forcing people to upgrade as they are for piracy.
I really hope this simcity ISN’T an all time classic game, because unlike other alltime classic games it won’t be available in a few years once they switch off the server.
11/03/2013 at 14:10 terry says:
While this is true, EA have been preaching the games-as-service mantra for quite some time, the most obvious examples being the SimsStore in TS3 and requiring Origin logins to be able to run Mass Effect and Dragon Age dlc. There are probably other more recent examples, but I stopped buying EA stuff at least a year ago. At least part of the reason they’re not on Steam anymore is because by using a closed DLC system they stand to earn much more than pursuing a traditional expansion pack model (they never put DLC on sale because they don’t have to) and as an added bonus drive people to Origin, a service they would be unlikely to use for any other reason.
It makes business sense (probably) but offers absolutely no benefit to consumers, which is pretty much where EA are at.
11/03/2013 at 13:25 Filthius says:
Nothing is good about always on DRM. Ubisoft woke up and smelt the coffee and realised all it does is alienate the very people they are trying to get to buy there games by not allowing them to play the damn things. Sure piracy is a problem, but this isn’t the answer. Piracy can never be stopped fully. The only sensible way to deal with it is to make it irrelevant. How do you do that? Price. Look at the Steam sales, how often do you read on here people saying “not gonna buy it now, ill wait till its in a steam sale”, and so many software titles sell many more copies once they are cheaper. Lowering the base price for software will bring more sales , as people are more likely , just by human nature to take a chance on something that doesn’t cost the earth. Thats my humble opinion.
11/03/2013 at 13:26 Lemming says:
“These are continuous deep-running flaws designed to cripple the game for you as a player, simply to serve some nebulous notion of protecting the game against piracy.”
John, we both know that isn’t true. At least have to balls to call it what it is, man! Piracy is just the scapegoat. EA were never being impacted seriously by pirates.
It’s not an accident that turning games into a ‘service’ means that EA have full control over when you play and how you play. They also just so happen to be able to monetise every aspect of your game, and just so happen to be in a position to cut you off at their discretion..say…when the next game they want you to buy comes out? And, oh look! They now have access to all your gaming habits and data for their own market research and targeting! What a stroke of luck!
11/03/2013 at 13:29 Danorz says:
yeah, piracy is the excuse, “games as service” and diminished consumer rights is the goal
11/03/2013 at 13:29 WoundedBum says:
While always online DRM is not the way to go, piracy is still an issue.
11/03/2013 at 13:33 diamondmx says:
Not disagreeing with you necessarily, but what *are* they trying to do then, in your opinion?
Continually monitor your play?
Create a decent reason and method for microtransactions in single-player? (Are there any in new-SC?)
Kill a second hand market, which does exist on PC anyway (because consumer rights, like, lololol)?
I mean, unless they genuinely believe the ‘piracy is going to kill us’ and ‘we can stop it if we just screw over enough paying customers’ stories – I really don’t see what purpose there is to this.
Are they just assholes?
11/03/2013 at 13:38 Lemming says:
I’m guessing you wrote this before I added my edit!
11/03/2013 at 13:26 P34nk says:
The best RPS article I read so far about online-only DRM and SimCity. About the only article I retweeted so far too :)
Keep up the good fight! Those who would still like to prove that city building game can and have to be built with offline capability should look into Civitas!
11/03/2013 at 15:17 mr.ioes says:
As I said earlier, civitas most likely is a scam. Better idea to follow Sacred 3 or upcoming 2D city-builder Medieval Mayor.
11/03/2013 at 13:28 limimi says:
I agree on a lot of what’s said in this article, except for one thing – SimCity has been built from the ground up to be multiplayer and always online. You can say it’s not the SimCity you want, that they should have called it SimCity Online or something, and that there should be single player component regardless, but for the past year EA and Maxis have been very clear that the new SimCity would be always online at all times and was being built from the ground up to be designed for online play. Those aren’t just excuses some fans have made up to defend their latest $80 investment, that’s what has been said about it from the beginning.
Did they do it for anti-piracy reasons? Did they do it to milk consumers? Did they try to blend the profitable social games market with MMOs and city management for some bizarre and probably cultish reason? Did they do it to fund their evil kitten killing schemes? Yes to all of the above probably, but I didn’t buy SimCity because I knew that’s what it would be, and if you did buy it expecting anything else you are madder than my neighbour – and when it is raining he likes to stand in his backyard in his underwear and stare up at the sky.
That said, we should have kicked up a stink earlier – and we should definitely kick up a stink now – before we had at least had the fantasy that it might turn out ok.
11/03/2013 at 13:42 Sander Bos says:
So you say informed buyers could have known what they were getting into, except for the current launch issues.
But let me ask you then: How long (how many years) is you expectation that you will be able to run this game?
I don’t think there are any formal commitments on their part for the length of support they will be giving.
I mean, I am sure it will be supported for years and years, but since people are still playing Sim City 4, they would have to support the game to at least 2023 to match that, and I think that is far from a guarantee.
11/03/2013 at 13:29 Dinger says:
Absolutely.
Now, here’s the problem from another perspective. I think somewhere in that Polygon magic-eightball score shifting debate used the analogy to restaurant reviews: the game is the food, but one must criticize the service too. And if the service is terrible, the review must suffer.
Wrong. Unless it’s a high-profile “celebrity” restaurant, reviews do not come out on the day of the grand opening, or even in the first few weeks afterwards. That’s because restaurants need time to iron out their bugs, and they are inherently a limited-capacity service.
What the problem of “always-on” DRM and “microtransaction-enhanced” games underscore is that you can’t sell your game as a service and keep the retail business model, where a major part of your sales happen in week one. If you require the massive PR push of a release day, always-on DRM will hit max stress at exactly the moment you need maximum player buzz. To use the restaurant analogy, it’s like opening a restaurant that serves half the meals of its lifetime in the first week. It just won’t work.
What’s EA/Maxis response to John’s “perfect laptop-on-the-train gaming … that’s rendered impossible to play on a laptop on the train. It’s ideal flight fodder, that no one can play on flights.” ?
Probably: “That’s what SimCityTab™ and SimCityMobile™ are for.
The Boardroom tries to dictate how their “IP” can be “monetized” to avoid “cannibalizing” sales. In other words, they give users a game, dictate the conditions under which users can use it, invite them to spend more money to change the conditions, and then wonder why everyone’s playing Minecraft instead.
11/03/2013 at 14:21 c-Row says:
I don’t see why I should go eating at a place where I am treated like shit, no matter how good the food is. Not to mention that it isn’t the best food in town either.
11/03/2013 at 14:22 Hahaha says:
You shouldn’t, but do you constantly tell people you meet that the place is shit they are doing these things wrong and no one should eat there?
11/03/2013 at 14:24 c-Row says:
If they tell me they are planning to go there, yes. Why wouldn’t I?
11/03/2013 at 15:50 Hahaha says:
Must be fun being around you the days following you going somewhere slightly under your standards.
I’m picturing every other sentence being about how bad this place was.
11/03/2013 at 16:18 c-Row says:
The term was “shit”, not “slightly under my standards”. If you like twisting words around in people’s mouths just to prove your point you are probably no fun to be with either.
12/03/2013 at 00:30 Kamos says:
This is not about food. This is about crippleware and infusing consumers with a mindset in which they accept software to be crippled.
Using the food analogy, you’re damn right I want to keep people from considering that eating hamburgers made with spoiled ingredients is “ok, as long as it tastes good”. Sooner or later, every restaurant will be selling rotten food.
11/03/2013 at 15:23 Dinger says:
You don’t review an 80-seat restaurant negatively because the wait for a table is unbearable, or that they have teething problems right after opening. You absolutely must lambaste a video game for failing to work. And even if it does work, you have to criticize it if its usage conditions do not square with the way people use computers. Again, you don’t criticize a restaurant for being closed on Mondays. You do criticize a SP-only game for not being playable offline.
Here’s an idea: bring out numerical scores for RPS. Maybe with a Polygonesque proviso that subsequent patches will change that number. But give two numbers:
Our score:
SimCity™ Retail Version: 4.5
SimCity™ Pirate Version: 9.0
Since game scores are supposed to be a measure of value, and measurable value is provided by DRM (negative), social (neutral) and post-retail updates and patches (usually positive), make it clear how much more or less value the Retail version has.
And get a Metacritic entry for the pirate versions too.
11/03/2013 at 15:41 Stellar Duck says:
I certainly would review a place badly if they made me wait, even if it opened 30 min earlier. If they expect me to pay then I expect them to deliver. I can’t be bothered about teething problems. If they don’t deliver the product why should I deliver the money?
I certainly make a habit of warning friends and relatives if I get bad service in a place and recommend better places instead. I’d be a jerk not to.
11/03/2013 at 16:24 c-Row says:
- “Hey, remember that restaurant you have been to?”
- “Of course.”
- “Went there with my girlfriend yesterday and it was the worst evening ever. The food was good, but the waiter spat in our drinks and grabbed my girlfriend’s ass on the way out.”
- “Yeah, totally happened to us, too.”
- “WTF dude?! Why didn’t you tell me?!”
- “See, I thought you would only care about the quality of the food.”
- “What kind of jerk are you?”
11/03/2013 at 16:31 Stellar Duck says:
A very visual representation of why I make a habit of warning people. Made me laugh.
12/03/2013 at 00:03 D3xter says:
Your comment reminds me of the soup nazi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVqBzP0xdKk
11/03/2013 at 13:30 Vesuvius says:
I would like to subscribe to this newsletter.
Haven’t bought anything Blizzard / Activision or EA for several years now- and this is exactly why.
11/03/2013 at 13:30 Danda says:
BRAVO, JOHN WALKER.
There’s no other way to put it. Always online = no sale.
11/03/2013 at 13:30 Ignorant Texan says:
And, SimCity is, and has been since they began selling it again, in number 1 position in sales on AmazonUS digital download games list.
Even with the abysmal 1.5 star aggregate user rating .
And flagged with this…
Important Note on “SimCity”
Some customers may experience delays when connecting to SimCity servers. EA is actively working to resolve these issues. Please visit https://help.ea.com/en/simcity/simcity for more information. For your trouble, every SimCity player who has logged in and activated their game will receive a free PC download game from the EA portfolio, provided by EA. This offer extends to all digital download and physical disc SimCity customers. On March 18, SimCity players who have activated their game will receive an email from EA telling them how to redeem their free game.
I guess it’s the promise of a “free” game.
11/03/2013 at 13:46 Hahaha says:
They stopped selling it for something like 4 hours and only stopped selling the digital version (It dosen’t look like they decided to stop selling)
11/03/2013 at 13:31 cheborra says:
As the “Fight on Terror”, the “Fight on Piracy” is only an excuse.
What most of the Industry Lead Heads want is to roll in the “Service Model” (as in charging every month) slowly but surely.
They don’t care about burning some good titles with that objective, in fact I think they specifically use heavy weight franchises to push it harder.
Never forget that the people making the decisions is definitely not the same that the people making the game. They are business people, they don’t love a game, they love a “product”, and always have the profit as objective. Nothing more.
11/03/2013 at 13:32 WoundedBum says:
So has the game/will the game be pirated?
I wouldn’t pirate it myself, because the game is not something I like doesn’t mean I have the right to pirate it. I’m just interested in whether it’s been an effective DRM method.
11/03/2013 at 13:39 SuperNashwanPower says:
Good point. Because if it works….
Shit.
11/03/2013 at 13:32 Soapeh says:
The biggest issue I have found is that server status list is seemingly random but refuses to update properly. This means that I see different servers being available to what my friends do – yesterday all 3 of us were shown conflicting server full messages and there wasn’t a single common server that we could all log into simultaneously, despite all of us living in the same town.
The other issue, of course, is lack of centralised city saves. It’s fair enough being able to hop onto ‘any non-full server in the world’ but to have to start a new city from scratch each time you visit a new server (and, in many cases, be forced to start the tutorial again and have your achievements lost) is utterly ridiculous. EA are probably going to weasel in a premium-rate city transfer service in the future.
11/03/2013 at 13:34 Baboonanza says:
@John Walker
Obviously the article is spot on – the slippery slope is an often abused argument in Internet debate but this is certainly a case where the concern is merited.
However, I can’t help feeling that this is too late. Closing the gate after the horse has bolted etc. If you feel so strongly about the issue why didn’t this post (or something similar) appear before the game was released when it could have made more of a difference?
I know that if you respond you will be able to cite articles where it’s mentioned but I remember the coverage being much less vociferous than this article.
11/03/2013 at 19:58 MentatYP says:
Agreed. I’ve been crying out about this online abomination of a SimCity perversion for months now since they started talking up the always-online aspect of it, like some crazed prophet in the wilderness, which of course nobody listened to because I’m nobody. RPS slamming the game now is just a few months too late. Not that I don’t appreciate the effort because I certainly do and hope it will make a difference, but can you imagine the unlimited wells of I-told-you-so that RPS would be able to draw from if they had loudly predicted this debacle months ago? Instead it seems more like they were caught off guard, which I know they weren’t but appearances are everything.
This bears repeating though: Maxis are flat out lying to us about how much calculation is being offloaded to the servers. People have been able to play for hours while being disconnected from the SimCity servers. This means that all intra-city calculations needed to run a self-contained city are performed client-side. Why then are Maxis talking up the calculations as if the game wouldn’t run at all if not for the servers doing the heavy lifting? They’re quite simply lying by trying to make the server-side component sound more vital than it is to core gameplay in order to alleviate the scorn being poured upon them for their always-online design. More so than the always-online design itself, this kind of disdain for their customers’ intelligence is what really turns me off and has sealed the coffin on me ever buying this game.
11/03/2013 at 13:34 FurryLippedSquid says:
Couldn’t agree more, John, excellent critique.
BF3 was the last EA game I bought and it will be the last. While not as widespread as this launch the problems I had with that game & Origin are untold. I didn’t get a game until 2 months after launch and EA’s tech support were fecking useless. I will not be taken for a mug again.
So long EA, and thanks for all the fish.
11/03/2013 at 13:36 luukdeman111 says:
Now I just really hope that some pirate will crack the game because otherwise ea might decide that it was a success anyways…
11/03/2013 at 13:38 WoundedBum says:
No it would be better for this to not sell well, rather than get pirated.
The game has drm. They don’t want that, which is absolutely fair. That doesn’t give them the right to take the game for free though. However if you meant buy the game and then crack it to be offline…well that’s a different story.
11/03/2013 at 15:11 Dark Nexus says:
Totally agree.
I’d rather they not have the piracy crutch to use to blame a shortfall in sales.
11/03/2013 at 16:46 luukdeman111 says:
I’m not saying that I support stealing their product. I’d just like them to realise that DRM doesn’t work….
And apparantly SKIDROW has already cracked it, so if anyone here wants to play Simcity offline after legally buying it, you might wanna give it a shot.
11/03/2013 at 13:37 Glottis1 says:
Unfortunately EA probably thinks this as succes against pirating. Server issues means, more people bought it than EA expected = pirates bought the game.
11/03/2013 at 20:01 MentatYP says:
In their twisted logic I’m sure they think exactly this. Hopefully the sales will drop off dramatically after the first couple weeks of server issues and they’ll realize just how bad of a decision always-online was.
11/03/2013 at 13:37 photographerleia says:
I created an account with RPS so I could 100% support everything this article says. The lengths that players go to to defend draconian DRM from the publishers (*especially* always on DRM for single-player games) never ceases to both astound and confuse me. I could not wholeheartedly second everything said here more than I do right now.
11/03/2013 at 13:38 Zacqary Adam Green says:
You want to make SimCity online-only? Fine. Just make sure you:
- Only use server-side calculation as a graceful degradation method, assuming the goal is to lower the game’s system requirements. If Glassbox needs a quad-core and a CUDA-capable GPU to run at top settings, fine, let struggling machines attempt to connect to a server. Until they get a connection, make each agent represent multiple sims. If there’s 20,000 people in the city, only make 5,000 run around if that’s all the hardware can handle, and multiply everything that happens by 4.
- Use P2P as a fallback for region-sharing if the central server isn’t available. Directly connect players to one another, and require multiple peers to confirm what’s going on region-wide before executing the effects in anyone’s game.
If Maxis wants to take the blame, fine. Because they certainly lacked imagination on how to engineer this damn thing.
11/03/2013 at 14:36 c-Row says:
The question is – could they really not come up with a good way to catch the heavy server load like you suggest, or did they just not want to break their closed system open again and surrender total control over the game?
11/03/2013 at 13:38 UsF says:
Where is the upvote button? :)
Also how to support great games with bad publishing practices? Maybe you could do a guide for us about this issue.
11/03/2013 at 13:39 skalpadda says:
I’m happy you exist, John. Keep it up.
11/03/2013 at 13:39 pakoito says:
Some users from Reddit are reporting the sims are using a “shortest path” algorithm for most of their tasks, which is lazy implementation and far from computer-hogging.
11/03/2013 at 13:41 The Sombrero Kid says:
I might not agree with you if Sim City wasn’t clearly the MOST SINGLE PLAYER GAME EVER, what little social features it has seemingly force you to socialise with randoms rather than friends, meaning you might as well be playing with/against AI. As it stands there is almost nothing multiplayer about the game and nothing which couldn’t easily be disabled. it’s clear that the simulation has deliberately crippled to run on a centralised server, were it able to use the full computational ability of the client this would almost certainly be a better game. Sim City is literally DRM with a game bolted on, in a world where people are outraged at Games with DRM bolted on this simply shouldn’t stand.
11/03/2013 at 13:42 Hahaha says:
If I go to your blog will I find you rallying against netflix or using it?
11/03/2013 at 14:11 John Walker says:
You’d have to explain to me how my successfully watching a film, and the enjoyment of doing so, is hindered by a subscription service.
11/03/2013 at 14:18 Hahaha says:
Have to be online?
Depending on your connection?
11/03/2013 at 14:23 FurryLippedSquid says:
Ridiculous argument alert!
11/03/2013 at 14:27 Hahaha says:
Depends on there servers?
11/03/2013 at 14:34 GallonOfAlan says:
Netflix? Business model is entirely based around a subscription, online streaming service.
*Single-player* PC games – have worked for many years with no online requirement, therefore addition of same is extracting the urine.
11/03/2013 at 14:54 Hahaha says:
You seem to be missing the signs of where this is all headed.
11/03/2013 at 15:01 Sheng-ji says:
Netflix: Pay a low monthly fee, access their entire catalogue.
EA: Pay a high one time fee, access one game.
Note how one is a valid service, the other is the sale of a licence but they are trying to pretend like it’s a service without giving you either the price cut or the greater access of a proper service like netflix.
11/03/2013 at 15:14 Brun says:
Thumbs up for making a rational argument that isn’t based on being upset that EA turned SimCity into something you didn’t like. This is a great example of why the entire business model is bad. This is what we should be focusing on.
12/03/2013 at 01:26 Kamos says:
Excelent point, Sheng-ji. They want to sell you one thing, give you another and support yet another. It is a bad, bad joke.
11/03/2013 at 16:55 roryok says:
If you ordered a DVD from amazon and then found out your DVD player had to have a net connection in order to play it, because that way you could look up trivia, would you not be annoyed? If the film itself did not need an internet connection?
12/03/2013 at 00:24 D3xter says:
Streaming a movie requires an Online connection, they could also make it a “buy”-service where you can download it and watch whenever you want, but that’s a different matter.
Building a city by your lonesome on a game you bought and installed doesn’t.
It is really that simple, one is justified – the other is not, so your argument doesn’t make any sense.
12/03/2013 at 01:33 Kamos says:
Yet another unwitting defender of crippleware. Here, these are the things you’re comparing:
Netflix = “pay us and get access to our online repository of movies and tv shows!”
EA’s Sim City = “pay us for a local application that we designed to artificially require an internet connection!”
Your point would only be valid if:
1) EA was selling access to an online repository of games; and
2) Those games could nonetheless be acquired elsewhere, i.e., stores, arcades, rental services, etc.
11/03/2013 at 13:43 HunterKing says:
I never thought I’d see some of the beautiful blight of my home (New Orleans) on RPS
12/03/2013 at 03:29 MacTheGeek says:
Is that Nawlins? I thought sure it was Detroit.
/searches images through Google/
Okay, so only the second picture comes from Detroit; the other four are from the Big Easy. Maybe that’s a subtle statement about city sizes in EA’s current game; you just can’t get the massive urban and industrial blight of Detroit in the new SimCity, you can only model smaller blighted areas like New Orleans.
11/03/2013 at 13:50 daphne says:
This post marks (probably) the only time I and John Walker are in complete agreement. You’re putting those fiery emotions into good use!
11/03/2013 at 13:53 frightlever says:
Ubisoft aren’t adding always on DRM to future games and I think they may have removed it from some games, but doesn’t Settlers 7, for one, still require it if you want to play the DLC? When they gonna patch that out? What possible use could it serve, unless it’s still being used as a metric of some kind.
11/03/2013 at 13:55 Alexandros says:
Bravo, John, bloody well said.
11/03/2013 at 13:56 kwyjibo says:
People don’t really care about DRM unless it’s broken. People don’t really give a fuck about their consumer rights – they just want stuff to work.
The utility that Steam gives me is worth more to me than the DRM costs me. People who are still buying SimCity have made the calculation that the always online nature of the game costs less to them than the enjoyment they get from the game.
We’re moving away from packaged goods into games as a service. This is how capitalism works, it’s what we’ve chosen.
You want to see some figures? The Simpsons: Tapped Out was EA’s last big free to play mobile game. The launch was a complete clusterfuck, EA had to remove the game from the app store 3 days after launch due to server issues. It was embarrassing – because Zynga launch bigger games all the time without issue.
The last quarter – The Simpsons: Tapped Out made $23M in revenue. You cannot fucking argue with that.
http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/story/ea-simpsons-tapped-out-revenues-topped-23m-last-quarter/2013-01-31?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss
11/03/2013 at 13:58 kwyjibo says:
Also – “I feel very bad for many of the developers at Maxis, who would have set out to make the best game they could.”
No they didn’t. They set out to make the most money they could. The launch is a blip in their grand campaign.
11/03/2013 at 15:25 Random Gorilla says:
I doubt there’s any kind of profit-sharing at Maxis. A developer gets the same low salary (plus maybe a small bonus) whether the game makes $1 or $1,000,000,000 for EA.
11/03/2013 at 18:55 jrodman says:
They may have an ESPP (Employee Stock Purchase Plan) which is good for like a few thousand a quarter, and a bit more if EA stock goes way on the upswing.
But per project? Yeah, certainly not.
11/03/2013 at 14:08 Hahaha says:
Indeed, The demographic who use this site are the minority and they seem to forget that.
12/03/2013 at 01:40 Kamos says:
Your point being? That this is something irrelevant for us to discuss?
Games are software. They are not movies, they are not books and they are not music. They are not some undefined work of entertainment. If you deliberately cripple your software in a way that people can’t even use it, there should be some repercussion.
If an automaker made a crippled car, with an engine that would turn itself off for no good reason at all, there would be hell to pay. However, since this is a game, a corporation like EA is given a free pass to prey on the average consumer’s naiveté. This is not irrelevant.
11/03/2013 at 13:58 Jenks says:
How about writing an article and putting the blame where it actually belongs, on pirates. I suppose you wouldn’t want to offend your readership, though.
11/03/2013 at 14:08 Glottis1 says:
Do people still torrent games? This is serious question. I dont know anyone who does, but dont have a lot of friends.
11/03/2013 at 14:10 Hahaha says:
Do people still drink beer?
11/03/2013 at 14:14 Jenks says:
2dboy posted extremely compelling numbers showing that World of Goo was pirated in the 80-90% range. That’s a game with no DRM, released at a cheap price point, and available from just about everywhere – you know, the pirate apologist excuse trifecta.
11/03/2013 at 14:40 Glottis1 says:
World of goo was released in 2008.
Yes, of cource people still download games. When this pirate blaming started it was a real problem, but i am not sure if pirating is as big problem as it used to.
We have more choices now to buy games at reasonable price, like steam.
11/03/2013 at 14:57 Jenks says:
World of Goo was released at a reasonable price on Steam, as well as *everywhere else,* and DRM free. Your reasoning that piracy is no longer an issue because since World of Goo, games have become reasonably priced and available on Steam, is hard to argue against.
11/03/2013 at 15:38 Glottis1 says:
Change takes time. In 2008 steam was just starting to become what it is today. It was pretty big then, but now only now it is accepted by majority.
11/03/2013 at 15:53 Jenks says:
There is no argument for this. If you think that piracy no longer is an issue because you and your friends discovered Steam after 2008 and stopped pirating games, and that EA and Activision are implementing always online DRM, as well as microtransactions, gamification, online passes, etc because they think it’s funny to dick with their customers, then we’ll just disagree.
11/03/2013 at 18:58 jrodman says:
Glottis asked if it is still as significant. He or she personally doubts it.
You don’t have numbers, apparently.
That doesn’t mean that Glottis says it is not significant. Reading comprehension is a good skill.
You may feel the question is slanted (I don’t) but you’re not contributing to any potential discussion here. (Neither am I, but it’s dead now.)
11/03/2013 at 19:32 SkittleDiddler says:
Until we get official numbers that cover the entire industry, quoting them for a single game doesn’t mean jack.
11/03/2013 at 20:49 RobF says:
I’m fairly certain World Of Goo made and still makes a substantial amount of money for 2D Boy. Maybe you should ask Ron how it’s fared for him and how it’s doing just to check before you go screaming piracy-o-geddon.
Because it turns out that even though lots of people pirate games, a massively significant portion of people buy games. Enough to make very comfortable livings for lots of people.
And certainly, enough to keep a lot of people at AAA publishers in very fast cars and boats too. Now, I know that doesn’t really filter down to developers a lot of the time and they’re very good at engineering situations whereby bonuses to devs are tied to sales and look at those piracy figures, look how many people are downloding that game I contributed to and I probably won’t get my bonus or something because IF ONLY MORE PEOPLE BOUGHT THEM MY STUDIO WOULD STILL BE OPEN! or I’D HAVE BEEN PAID MY CASH BONUSES LAST CHRISTMAS but when you don’t see those guys with their boats and their cars suffering, isn’t that odd? Can you see Kotick or Riccitiello suffering from piracy? Why is that again, man?
And isn’t it odd that despite rampant piracy, despite a fair amount of piracy sitting in 90-95 percent mark, more people than ever before are making more money than ever before (even the lowest indie now has more chance of selling more copies of their game than they would have even 2 years ago) and more money is being spent than ever before on more and a wider spread of games?
Isn’t it odd that EA can afford to spend millions developing games? How *do* they manage that with all those pirates nibbling at their toes for all these years?
How does anyone even manage to make games in 2013 with all these pirates everywhere? It’s crazy! This isn’t a new thing, it’s been going on since the dawn of videogames so how is it that the industry is even here today?
But yeah, forget that. It’s totally pirates or something. Gotta watch out for them and stuff. They’ll kill us all.
13/03/2013 at 12:34 Tarkeel says:
2Dboys’ 90% piracy rate comes from finding that the game phoned home from ten times more IPs then they had sold copies of the game. To put it mildly, this methodology for counting legitmate use vs piracy, is flawed. My copy of the game has been used on atleast 4 different hardware setups, let alone different IPs.
11/03/2013 at 14:13 John Walker says:
It’s more facts and evidence that I don’t want to offend.
11/03/2013 at 14:23 Jenks says:
You should try harder then.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/11/15/world-of-goo-piracy-rate-82/
Apparently your response to the hardest evidence we’ll ever see that piracy is rampant wasn’t an indictment of piracy, but musings of “what does piracy represent, anyway?” You do a great disservice to PC gaming by pandering to your readership – or should we call them “the 90%?”
11/03/2013 at 14:37 Sheng-ji says:
I believe that is what is known as a biased source.
If you believe that always on is about DRM, you are sadly mistaken. It’s no co-incidence that nearly every always on game that has ever been released has had a real money microtransaction store.
11/03/2013 at 14:53 Jenks says:
That is the most unbiased source you can possibly find. You’ll need to expand on why you feel that way.
11/03/2013 at 15:03 Sheng-ji says:
Someone with a financial vested interest releasing piracy stats on his game and you can’t see the conflict of interest?
Maybe I’ll go to phizer to obtain statistics on how effective cancer treatments are as opposed to an independently funded review.
11/03/2013 at 15:12 Jenks says:
“Someone with a financial vested interest releasing piracy stats on his game and you can’t see the conflict of interest?”
I’m seriously baffled, what financial interested did they have for releasing the piracy stats? Pity sales? Also, if you’re going to respond, please let me know specifically which numbers you think were inaccurate or biased. I would also like to know what you would consider an unbiased source for accurate piracy statistics.
Your edit, the phizer metaphor, is silly and irrelevant. This isn’t 2dboy reviewing its own game, it’s 2dboy giving hard numbers and statistics on sales. People get those types of numbers from phizer, and every other corporation, all the time.
11/03/2013 at 15:29 Sheng-ji says:
Those stats were released on November the 14th 2008.
The game was relaunched in April 2009. The game was relaunched again in November 2009. The game was relaunched again on iOS in April 2011. The game was relaunched again on Android in November 2011.
So yes, they were still planning on selling their game. Which means they were very much planning on benefiting from their game financially when they released those figures. Which means those figures are inherently biased (Which they would have been even if they weren’t planning on 4 rereleases). Which means I choose not to take them at their word, even if they are properly nice guys, and plenty of conmen appear nice on the surface, even if they believe those stats themselves, unless they and many many other games companies release their raw data and an independent, independently funded review is set up using unbiased industry experts, all statistics are untrustworthy. This is how the world we live in works, because most people will lie (to themselves as well as to the public) in order to line their own pockets.
Welcome to a world in which a significant proportion of people believe you need to drink 8 glasses of water a day to stay healthy because Lucazade told them they did, just as they released their hydration range ;)
11/03/2013 at 15:45 Jenks says:
Such a study will obviously never be done, so your argument is silly. Piracy isn’t a problem/doesn’t exist until an independent study is done? Please.
You still haven’t answered the question about why releasing the piracy numbers “lined their pockets.” Is your answer seriously pity sales? I was being facetious when I suggested that, I’m sorry if that didn’t come across. So, how is it that they benefited?
You you have a wonderful world view for a pirate apologist: bury your head in the sand, and then explain that you won’t dig it out unless a bunch of impossible criteria materialize. I have news for you: it never will materialize – but you know that already. You claim “that’s the way the world works.” The way the world works is, publishers know whats going on, and they don’t care about what you believe. They’re ruining games with restrictive DRM, microtransactions, DLC, and gamification to fight piracy. Your opinion, my opinion, they’re meaningless. The facts speak for themselves.
11/03/2013 at 15:55 Sheng-ji says:
Let me make this crystal clear. I am not a pirate apologist. I condemn piracy in all it’s forms and have never pirated a game. I would willingly prove this to you if you can tell me how. But by the same merit, I don’t accept opinion or biased sources as fact, even if it coincides with my beliefs, which is what you are doing.
As you clearly are not reading what I have written, let me restate this one more time. They were in negotiations with Nintendo to relaunch their game when they decided to release those stats. They were not after pity sales, they were after positive publicity as part of their campaign to relaunch their game, something they have done 4 times to date.
Thanks for your news update, but just like your uneducated opinion on piracy, your opinion on the power games industry analysts have is wrong. Games industry analysis is worth millions. There is plenty of money for such a review and the only reason it will not happen is because the major players in the games industry will not release their raw data.
And just because an independent study has not been done, doesn’t make a statement from a biased source a reasonable or accurate source of information.
I’m done talking to you now, by all means go research how to properly vet statistics and sources, there are plenty of good books on the subject.
11/03/2013 at 15:59 Vermintide says:
“Let me make this crystal clear. I am not a pirate apologist. I condemn piracy in all it’s forms and have never pirated a game”
Why not?
11/03/2013 at 16:17 Sheng-ji says:
@Vermintide – I believe that if I am enjoying a game, the developers deserve the asking price for it. I am quite capable of wanting a game but not be prepared to pay the current asking price – like scribblenauts. When it reaches a price point I am comfortable with, I will buy it. If I get burned by a game, pay and it’s crap then I exercise great care when buying games from the companies involves again.
Can’t say it happens much though, there’s so much information on the internet these days it’s difficult to make an uninformed choice.
This is my personal opinion and I have no interest in forcing it on others. I shared it because I was asked.
11/03/2013 at 16:20 FurryLippedSquid says:
Didn’t Ubi say last year that 95% of all PC games are pirated?
Just plucked it outta the air… much like your above source.
11/03/2013 at 16:28 darkChozo says:
The above source cites high score server IP hits relative to number of recorded sales. That’s certainly something that can be questioned on grounds of poor methodology or on conflict of interest, but not something that can be called “plucked outta the air” with impunity.
11/03/2013 at 16:32 Jenks says:
“Let me make this crystal clear. I am not a pirate apologist.”
Yes, you are.
“I’m done talking to you now”
Farewell, and try not to get sand up your nose.
“Just plucked it outta the air… much like your above source.”
Are you serious?
11/03/2013 at 16:58 Sheng-ji says:
Go on then Jenks, I’ll bite one more time but only because I can reiterate just how stupid you are being.
Just because I dispute the legitimacy of your source does not mean I am defending piracy.
If we all jumped on whatever bullshit source no matter how obvious the bullshit which attempts to demonstrate that piracy does harm the games industry, we will only do the entire debate harm, because no-one could take those arguments seriously.
Which is why you if anyone is doing the pirates a favour by being so single minded and refusing to entertain the idea that your “fact” is from a biased source and should not be taken seriously.
No sand up my nose but plenty of egg on your face!
Toodlepips!
11/03/2013 at 17:17 roryok says:
@Jenks you keep referring to 2dBoys 80-90% piracy report, but either you haven’t read it, or you’ve misinterpreted it (perhaps deliberately so).
Anyone interested, including Jenks, can read about it here
http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/
from that article (emphasis theirs, not mine):
You keep citing this 80-90% piracy rate (here and in other comments) as a defence for EA/Maxis making a single-player game require an internet connection. 2DBoy’s own studies, which is in your own words
found that having DRM made no difference to the game. They estimated that only 1 in 1000 of that 90% would ever have bought the game in the first place, DRM or no.
11/03/2013 at 19:09 jrodman says:
Jenks, calling Sheng-Ji a pirate apologist when she has not ever apologized for piracy fits well with your accusations of Rock Paper Shotgun as pandering to pirates when it does not do so.
You clearly have your own idea of how things will work and what people will say and are willing to slot people into friend or foe, facts-be -damned and understanding run rough over.
I’m not sure what you believe you are accomplishing by your windmill tilting exercise, but I am fairly certain the actual results are making the world a slightly more annoying place.
11/03/2013 at 14:37 aepervius says:
How about you showing that pirated game are really a loss for the company ? Because so far as I can see , nobody ever demonstrated that.
11/03/2013 at 14:46 Jenks says:
Can you explain a scenario where game piracy isn’t a massive loss for the game industry?
If the 90% of people playing games and not paying for them suddenly couldn’t play them for free anymore, is it your supposition that they’d move on to other hobbies? I’m fascinated by this line of thought and I would love for you to expound upon it.
11/03/2013 at 14:47 VikingMaekel says:
I’m not saying every pirated copy is a lost sale.
But I bet it’s not fun to see your game being pirated that much. Also, illegal and harming the gaming industry and making companies develop these asinine DRM measures which we don’t want and hardly ever work.
11/03/2013 at 16:44 Snargelfargen says:
@Jenks
You argument relies on the assumption that people who pirate games can actually afford to buy them. Do you have any information to back that up?
I’m genuinely curious as to the answer actually. I have pirated media when there wasn’t room in my budget. I often purchase legal copies when life allows, as they are often superior (a physical copy, ease of use as opposed to shady cracks, or even bonus material like artwork and soundtracks).
I would have spent X amount on media regardless. The only difference is that my choices are more informed.
11/03/2013 at 17:34 Jenks says:
“You argument relies on the assumption that people who pirate games can actually afford to buy them. Do you have any information to back that up?”
I don’t have raw data of the expendable income of pirates, and neither do you. What we both have is common sense. I would assume that all people with a computer capable of playingnew release games have enough money to buy games on sale, yes. Steam has a ton of games constantly under $5, and even under $1. If they are pirating new release games that they cannot afford instead of buying older games on sale, that is hurting the games industry a great deal.
11/03/2013 at 18:10 Snargelfargen says:
Supposing time spent playing games equates to not buying new games, then steam sales are a part of the problem as well, since they are actually quite popular and contribute to devaluing the market. Following that logic, AAA games are unsustainable, and the solution should be to lower development costs.
Edit: or indulge in price-fixing! I believe Steam has to ask for permission before putting a game on sale. Presumably the number crunchers at the big publishers think having sales is more profitable though.
Not sure if that’s even right though, since in my admittedly anecdotal experience, folks are quite happy to keep on buying games, music and movies they don’t have time to enjoy.
11/03/2013 at 18:27 Jenks says:
If you can’t afford full priced games, buy ones on sale. If I’m reading your argument right then I’m completely flabbergasted. There are so many cheap games, so you should steal expensive ones you can’t afford?
11/03/2013 at 18:28 x1501 says:
“I don’t have raw data of the expendable income of pirates, and neither do you.”
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_sof_pir_rat-crime-software-piracy-rate
As you can see, it’s the poorest countries that lead the world in software piracy, and according to such independent piracy studies as Media Piracy in Emerging Economies, it’s:
“High prices for media goods, low incomes, and cheap digital technologies are the main ingredients of global media piracy. Relative to local incomes in Brazil, Russia, or South Africa, the retail price of a CD, DVD, or copy of MS Office is five to ten times higher than in the US or Europe. Legal media markets are correspondingly tiny and underdeveloped.”
That most software piracy in the world is driven by prohibitively high prices is a fact, not a wild guess.
11/03/2013 at 18:31 Capt. Eduardo del Mango says:
“Can you explain a scenario where game piracy isn’t a massive loss for the game industry?”
OMSI is an incredibly niche bus simulator – it does a few routes from Berlin in the ’60s and costs 30 Euro. Now, for me, however good it is, it’s just not worth 30 Euro, and there’s no demo. Out of curiosity, I downloaded a copy and had a quick go on it. I told RPS Steam chatter Dr. Teflon (who’s interested in vehicle sims) about it, and on my recommendation he tried it and purchased a copy.
Word of mouth is a good way for information about really niche products to work its way around ‘cos people select friends they know would be interested in it, aware that they won’t necessarily get information about that niche through mainstream channels. There’s no way I’d have purchased a copy of it (it remained on my PC for about an hour, if you’re wondering), so no way I’d have played it without pirating it, and there’s no way I’d have been able to encourage Teflon to purchase it if I hadn’t played it.
There you go, piracy benefiting games publishers.
11/03/2013 at 18:31 Snargelfargen says:
Nope, definitely not my intention. Think I’ll have another coffee, then figure out where the miscommunication is.
11/03/2013 at 18:58 Snargelfargen says:
Ok, here we go: “If I’m reading your argument right then I’m completely flabbergasted. There are so many cheap games, so you should steal expensive ones you can’t afford?”
No. Pirating an expensive game does not preclude purchasing a cheaper one.
“If they are pirating new release games that they cannot afford instead of buying older games on sale, that is hurting the games industry a great deal.”
Implicit in this statement is the assumption that people only buy games when they have run out of things to play. That’s not how sales work. Sales are all about lowering the barrier for impulse purchases. People buy games and all sorts of other things they don’t intend to use immediately.
13/03/2013 at 12:52 jalf says:
Are *you* suggesting that people would literally be spending TEN TIMES as much money on video games, if piracy wasn’t an option? Really? Honestly? You think that is a thing that would happen?
Yes, they absolutely would move on to other hobbies because they aren’t millionaires.
Where do you suggest all this extra money would come from? Are you assuming that the evil pirates sit around hoarding piles of cash that they never spend on anything, that they *could* choose to use to buy games, but which they’d rather just keep around? Otherwise, the money would have to come from somewhere. What would they then spend less on? And which industries would suffer as a result?
Anyway, you were the one who wanted to use facts, weren’t you? And now you’re saying that you don’t need facts to show that a high piracy rate actually causes a monetary loss for the games industry.
Stick to your own rules, please.
YOU posted a link to an old post by 2dboy which indicated two things:
- yes, the piracy rate on PC games is high, and
- no, reducing the piracy rate on PC games does not increase revenue
And now you seriously expect us to accept, on the basis of this that:
- the piracy rate on PC games is high (fair enough, you cited evidence to that effect)
- reducing the piracy rate on PC games would increase revenue (WHAT???? Just WHAT. You are making that part up, and ignoring that it flatly contradicts the source you cited. I’m sorry, but that’s not how it works)
11/03/2013 at 16:58 roryok says:
This comment would seem to suggest that everyone who reads this website is a pirate. Well here’s one that isn’t. Also go fuck yourself.
11/03/2013 at 17:14 Brun says:
He and Joshua Northley should start an “Everyone who reads RPS is a dirty, thieving, college-age pirate who lives off their parents’ money and has no self-control or responsibility” fan club.
11/03/2013 at 17:56 Jenks says:
Feelings hurt or what? I read RPS too, obviously. So, go fuck yourself, too. Did I sign off properly?
/shrug
I have no idea who Joshua Northley is. I’ve just read the comments section of enough RPS stories on piracy to know who they’re attracting.
11/03/2013 at 19:59 roryok says:
Yes my feelings are hurt. You just called me and everyone else who reads RPS a pirate because you don’t agree with an opinion in an article.
/shrug
11/03/2013 at 21:38 RobF says:
I too know precisely the kind of people RPS attracts as someone who’s repeatedly been able to make a link between a post on RPS being made about my work and me being able to eat (or my aunt: http://storify.com/retroremakes/what-you-did-if-you-bought-death-ray-manta-this-we ) Which is at least a demonstrable thing unlike your paranoid conspiracies about pirates.
And hey, I’m fucking thankful knowing people will and do pay for my work. Shame more people don’t extend that grace instead of chasing demons, eh?
11/03/2013 at 17:18 TechnicalBen says:
Could that 90% piracy rate have spiked on the day they took down legitimate purchases from their website because they signed an exclusivity deal with a Nintendo Publisher? I bet they “forget” to mention that?
I went to their site with cash in hand to find out the day after I found out about their game, they took down the option for me to purchase it. They lost a customer for life there.
11/03/2013 at 17:59 Jenks says:
You should steal it then, obviously. You’re entitled to not having to buy it elsewhere.
11/03/2013 at 20:00 roryok says:
no, ben, no… that’s a silly argument.
12/03/2013 at 01:01 D3xter says:
I hate people bringing that up… I mean, here is how they came to their 80-90% “piracy rate”: http://2dboy.com/2008/11/13/90/
“first, and most importantly, how we came up with this number: the game allows players to have their high scores reported to our server (it’s an optional checkbox). we record each score and the IP from which it came. we divided the total number of sales we had from all sources by the total number of unique IPs in our database, and came up with about 0.1. that’s how we came up with 90%.”
The only thing they’ve “proven” is that apparently there’s between 80-90% of people that didn’t play the game with the same IP address as before… suffice to say that there are large amounts of people with dynamic/changing IP addresses (I for instance have a new one at least every 24 hours), or people that might also enjoy their game at work/school, via WiFi from different spots on a laptop or similar…
Further, you seem to be ignoring every other datapoint (that people have even already mentioned) like Steam not being as popular back then as it is now (first publisher partnership and 3rd party games were late 2005, SteamWorks didn’t even launch until 2008).
I’ve been using Steam only for Valve games till about 2010, now I have hundreds of games on it.
Further, you seem to be ignoring things like demographics, piracy might overall be a “big problem”. But it is an especially “big problem” in countries like China: http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/06/09/e3-2011-torchlight-pirated-over-5-million-times-in-china-runic-ceo-thats-fine-with-us/
This is an emergent, but very difficult market. For one they entirely banned console sales over there and are only now in talks of allowing them. As such, China is a nation of PC Gamers. And even though Steam exists there, it apparently only works properly with certain Telecommunication companies and there are restrictions. For instance Valve itself had to partner with “Perfect World” to be allowed to launch DOTA 2 in China.
As is noted in the above interview it can also be seen as building up an audience/future market when things get easier down the line:
“Millions and millions of copies of Torchlight downloaded from the illicit market in certain Asian territories. And that’s fine with us. We knew it was gonna happen. For us, we kind of see it as, down the road, we’re building an audience. We’ve long since announced that we’re going to be doing an MMO, and y’know, we kind of view it as a marketing tool for us. We’re going to have millions of people who are familiar with our franchise, familiar with our style, and who are going to be ready customers when we do a global MMO.”
You will likely find similar circumstances (and different priorities for the people) in countries from Eastern Europe or South America where people would still very much like to enjoy games every now and then and where piracy as a phenomenon is still big. Services like Steam have the chance to penetrate such markets though, for instance I believe they said that after Germany Russia is now the second most important “Mainland European” market.
You are not going to be able to build up these markets without considerable investments, and you are not going to persuade them to buy your products with “Always-Online DRM”, since if you think Internet availability and reliability is still bad in the US or Europe you are going to be in for quite the shock when it comes to South America, Africa or large parts of Asia. They will just not buy your products and will have no sentimentality for them in the future when they might be able to.
12/03/2013 at 01:55 Kamos says:
This is one of the most bizarre conversations I’ve had the displeasure to read in RPS.
@ Jenks
Good job on trying to distort what Sheng-ji has said, but no.
Also:
“You should try harder then.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/11/15/world-of-goo-piracy-rate-82/
Apparently your response to the hardest evidence we’ll ever see that piracy is rampant wasn’t an indictment of piracy, but musings of “what does piracy represent, anyway?” You do a great disservice to PC gaming by pandering to your readership – or should we call them “the 90%?””
Good job on disproving your own point about piracy!
You cite one source, the only one you’re willing give, then you go to great lengths to say that anyone who disbelieves it is an apologist of piracy, and then roryok thankfully restores sanity by pointing out that the source you’ve cited reaches the conclusion that DRM is irrelevant when trying to prevent piracy, invalidating both: 1) your idea that piracy is a good reason for DRM and 2) the idea that John Walker should simply have done a half-assed attempt like yours of reaching a conclusion about something using a single citation that doesn’t even support what you’re trying to prove.
That.
Was.
Priceless.
Also, fuck you. I’m not a “pirate” and I pay for games I don’t even play just to support the developers.
11/03/2013 at 15:26 Kadayi says:
ROTFLMAO
*goes to hospital to gets ribs fixed*
12/03/2013 at 12:21 anark10n says:
I would think it was your ass you would have fixed seeing as it’s the one that was in danger of detaching from your person because of your excessive good humour…
11/03/2013 at 14:36 WoundedBum says:
I agree that pirates are overlooked as a problem nowadays.
Always online isn’t the best response though, especially when it works as badly as this.
11/03/2013 at 21:43 Lagwolf says:
Yes screwing the honest customer who has spent upwards of $60 because of piracy. That is great way of discouraging people to pirate. That makes about as much sense as prohibition did in the 20′s in America.
11/03/2013 at 23:19 WoundedBum says:
As I said, this isn’t the right response to piracy, but piracy shouldn’t be ignored as a problem.
12/03/2013 at 02:06 Kamos says:
Can you prove piracy is a problem?
I mean, I’m pretty sure diminishing profit margins *IS* a problem, and then profit decreases if less copies are sold. But can you prove that every single pirated copy is a lost sale?
Just for the sake of conversation, here are some other things that also decrease sales:
1) Creating crippleware, selling it as a full priced product while advertising it as a single-player game
2) Using DRM to prevent paying consumers from playing
3) Creating cookie-cutter games that no one wants to play
4) Insulting the consumer’s intelligence
Here are things that increase sales:
1) Treating the consumer respectfully
2) Providing good service
3) Creating great games
4) Treating fans like fans, not idiots asking to be cheated
5) Gaining the sympathy of the “gamer”. The “gamer” is one of the most trusting creatures on planet earth, willing to go into Kickstarter and throw absurd amounts of money at developers just for the promise of getting a good game made.
12/03/2013 at 11:36 WoundedBum says:
Of course not every single pirated copy is a lost sale, but the argument that many of them aren’t is ridiculous. Look at The Witcher 2, they offered a GoG version with no DRM and plenty of free stuff to go with it and it was pirated extensively. Obviously some of those might be seeing if they can run it etc but there’s still going to be a significant amount who weren’t.
Piracy is a problem on PC whether we like it or not.
12/03/2013 at 17:26 Kamos says:
Really. Not only it is a problem, but “on PC”? Did you pull that out of thin air? Because if that is just your opinion, I think there is more piracy on consoles.
13/03/2013 at 07:18 WoundedBum says:
Well OK, I’m sure you think that but there’s very little to support that statement. Piracy on console is a lot harder to achieve with much more risk, so generally games are pirated far less on them.
13/03/2013 at 07:24 Kamos says:
I would agree if we were talking about 5 years ago. However, this is a time of Steam sales and digital distribution convenience on the PC, while consoles still have overpriced games that people either want to pirate or buy a used copy of.
But again, I don’t have any data to substantiate this, so…
11/03/2013 at 13:59 solymer89 says:
So will this end up like any other MMO, when the traffic on the servers slows and they stop making money through micro transactions, will they shut the servers down and kill and single player game like any common MMO? That sounds like it’s almost a crime of some sort.
11/03/2013 at 14:01 v_ware says:
Very interesting piece on Simcity and I agree.
But I’m more interested though in the legality of no refunds within the EU/UK. Would love to see an investigative piece on that. :)
11/03/2013 at 14:40 Sheng-ji says:
There’s no investigation to be had, it’s never been tested in court so the answer is, no-one can know for sure how this would play out.
11/03/2013 at 17:14 Milky1985 says:
Its never been tested in court because EA would not want it to be tested in court, they would lose hard and fast and it would set a precedent that they do not want.
Its flat out illegal, if the item is not fit for purpose you are entitled to a refund, it doesn’t matter that it “might work later” or if they are classing it as a license.
11/03/2013 at 14:02 pligas says:
Well, it’s not only DRM, it’s content management as well. Remember all those SC4 mods? We wouldn’t want them competing with $15 DLC now, would we?
11/03/2013 at 14:03 Tayh says:
I agree with the mindset of this article.
Now, if only people would apply those thoughts on steam and Origin as well…
11/03/2013 at 14:06 Aquarion says:
I disagree.
There are problems with SimCity, and especially with its launch, on how you handle the launch of online games, and how you test beforehand, and all of this kind of thing, but to ignore that for the puposes of this comment:
Simcity isn’t designed as a single player game.
You can go though SWTOR from zero to levelcap without grouping. You can certainly get to 65 in WoW the same way (I assume you can go the rest as well, but haven’t ever felt the need to try) and you can probably even do it with Guild Wars.
This SimCity on your own region, though, with your own little bubble of solitude, is SimCIty on hard mode. It is not designed to be played on your own. You will struggle to pay for all the things all the time, you will not have enough fire trucks to cope with disasters, your city won’t get any tourism, won’t be able to concentrate on being the best damn shopping district there has ever been because you can import shoppers and workers from elsewhere. This SImCity, the one that was released last week, and consistantly fell over because they didn’t expect people to play it for eight hour sessions, is designed as a multiplayer game.
How many times do Maxis employees have to say they designed it to be multiplayer before you believe what they say? Do you sit back with a new WoW expansion and complain how you’re forced to log in to quest, and how it would have been a lot better as a single player open world adventure game?
You may not be getting anything out of it being online, and the transition of a traditionally single player franchise into a server-client game is always going to cause some heartache, but declaring this is a single player game when the designers are telling you it isn’t seems arrogant.
They bollocksed up the launch completely, though.
11/03/2013 at 14:13 pakoito says:
>This SimCity on your own region, though, with your own little bubble of solitude, is SimCIty on hard mode. It is not designed to be played on your own. You will struggle to pay for all the things all the time, you will not have enough fire trucks to cope with disasters, your city won’t get any tourism, won’t be able to concentrate on being the best damn shopping district there has ever been because you can import shoppers and workers from elsewhere. This SImCity, the one that was released last week, and consistantly fell over because they didn’t expect people to play it for eight hour sessions, is designed as a multiplayer game.
Is designed as a BAD multiplayer game, with said MP elements shoehorned into the mechanics to fit DRM schemes. Don’t you think the game would play better if that not-really-interaction was done by IA or by other of the player’s cities?
11/03/2013 at 18:50 Vesuvius says:
Oh, we believe it was designed for multiplayer- the part we doubt is that it was made that way for any reason other than a desire for profit and control.
11/03/2013 at 19:39 MaXimillion says:
You’re not restricted to a single city. SimCity works just as well alone as it does with others, and you actually have an easier time since you can coordinate the cities easier.
11/03/2013 at 14:08 Lev Astov says:
*Applause*
11/03/2013 at 14:08 Sheng-ji says:
One thing that is really interesting is the idea that a server can handle some of the processing load.
Please note I don’t understand enough to be able to know if Simcity is actually doing much of this or not, nor am I trying to stick up for them, I agree with the article wholeheartedly in principle (in principle as I did not buy the game and will not if they do not remove the always on requirement).
But wouldn’t it be great, if this is possible in a sustainable way, to give players the option of having servers take the load off your computer in order to allow your computer to run the latest and greatest game. note the word option, as in turn offable!!!
11/03/2013 at 17:05 Aquarion says:
That’s kind of what Onlive & gaikai are trying to do, in fact.
12/03/2013 at 02:33 Kamos says:
Yep, it is possible. Actually, the technology itself is nothing new. There are all sorts of complex systems out there using a distributed architecture to provide redundancy and additional resources that any single node cannot have (i.e., raw processing power, storage, etc.).
In a factory floor, for instance, it is very common to use a microcontroller to read a sensor in a machine and send this information elsewhere. The information gets processed and a command is returned to the original node. Obviously, the network in this case is the critical component, and generally speaking factories, cars, airplanes, etc. use a very low level protocol in a very slow, but very reliable network, to make sure data isn’t corrupted or lost.
Also: you don’t “always online DRM” things like furnaces, ABS breaks, etc. That is stupid and dumb. Only game developers and EA can do it with impunity.
The problem with using this scheme in games is latency. You can certainly offload some tasks into servers, especially in a shared application (such as an MMO), but to really unleash this you’d need a very reliable, very low latency network. Games are reactive and instantaneous like that. As the above poster pointed out, there are attempts to do it, but it will probably only be a “really cool thing” once everyone has fiber at their door. Onlive wouldn’t even start for me.
11/03/2013 at 14:09 Kollega says:
Pictured: John Walker, being very British and very angry. A little too angry, perhaps.
Now, i am not planning on buying this game, anything from EA, or anything with an always-online DRM. And i totally agree that always-online DRM is a very bad idea. But calling it “Orwellian” is perhaps a step too far in the other direction. Of course, it makes an angry mob burning down the headquarters of the offending company seem like an option, but i don’t think it’s that good of an option. Burning something down is, and should always be, a last-ditch measure.
11/03/2013 at 14:35 FurryLippedSquid says:
You do know the definition of the word, right? Prettty sure there’s no connations of burning things down or smashing the state. It simply means being adverse to a free & open society.
11/03/2013 at 15:46 Kollega says:
Calling something “Orwellian” usually carries the implications of “things are bad, and we have to do something now, or we’ll be facing terrible, totalitarian consequences”. That’s what i meant.
11/03/2013 at 19:54 x1501 says:
In this case, “Orwellian” is probably a reference to the core tenets of EA’s business philosophy, which can generally be summed up as “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY” and “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH”.
12/03/2013 at 02:37 Kamos says:
Thank you for making me laugh.
11/03/2013 at 15:49 Stellar Duck says:
I keep wondering if he read it as Bradburyesque. :P
11/03/2013 at 16:40 Jraptor59 says:
Methinks he refers to the Big Brother controlling everything aspect. You read 1984?
11/03/2013 at 17:12 Stellar Duck says:
Yes. I was just musing about the fact that his talk about burning that which offends reminds me more of Ray Bradbury than George Orwell. Having read his elaboration I’ll say that my connotations of the word Orwellian are very different than his.
11/03/2013 at 14:16 Dariune says:
This article, whether effective or not, has restored some of my quickly dwindling faith in the games industry.
I agree wholeheartedly with the text, sentiment, tone and intentions of this article.
Thanks RPS. Big thumbs up from me.
11/03/2013 at 14:22 Ianuarius says:
If you want it? Sure shooting bad guys in Call of Duty sounds fun… if I want it!
Nobody is giving away their rights, even if they had any in the first place. It just sickens you that you can’t have the kinda game specifically YOU want. And you keep pounding the table with your spoon “No! I don’t want that! I want this!” Who cares what you want.
Listen. I don’t like the way Thief seems to be going, but that’s the way it’s gonna be. You can fight all you want but it’s not gonna amount to anything more than just bad atmosphere. Gamers want online multiplayer shit… even if you and I are not part of that demographic. Otherwise no developer would bother with it. Call it DRM all you want. It woun’t entitle you to anything but your imaginary rights as a guy who complains a lot on the Internet. :)
11/03/2013 at 14:43 Brun says:
This.
11/03/2013 at 16:29 maximiZe says:
Not this.
12/03/2013 at 02:39 Kamos says:
You have probably missed the part in which every other person agrees that Sim City is not an online game, especially since it has a single-player mode which happens to be online for no good reason at all. But carry on.
11/03/2013 at 14:26 Rider on the Storm says:
Fuck DRM, Fuck EA and Fuck that suit John Riccitiello for putting this broken game out to paying customers. Anyone worth their salt would avoid SimCity like an STD.
11/03/2013 at 14:29 VikingMaekel says:
I agree that the launch is a mess and that the always-online nature of the game is horrid.
Yes, it serves no end, except their own. And yes you can complain about it.
However, you make it seem like we are forced to buy this game. We’re not.
If you don’t like the DRM and the Always-Online nature of the game; don’t buy it. Nobody is forcing it down your throat if you don’t like it.
If a car has an underpowered engine and guzzles fuel but looks absolutely awesome, I’m not forced to buy it. I’ll buy another, worse looking, car without the fuel guzzling, or I’ll take public transportation. It might not be the same, it might not even be what I want, but no one is forcing it upon me.
If you don’t want it, don’t buy it. If you can’t find what you want, settle for something else/less or make it yourself and fill that niche in the market.
The ONLY way they will stop developing Always-On games is if we don’t buy them. Not by shouting bloody murder and still buying it in droves afterwards. That’s just irrelevant noise for them. We’re not going to change it that way.
11/03/2013 at 16:31 maximiZe says:
So you’re saying it would have taken a “DO NOT BUY THIS GAME” in bold for you to get the message?
11/03/2013 at 14:34 ass wasp says:
Good article John, please keep pursuing this, always on DRM is a cancer on both console and PC gaming, as someone who has a shaky internet connection and primarily enjoys singleplayer games this stuff makes games i’m interested in unbuyable.
11/03/2013 at 14:34 Deano2099 says:
Thought experiment:
Would you be this angry if it were the exact same game, but called “Sim City Online” ?
11/03/2013 at 14:42 Brun says:
They probably wouldn’t care at all if it were named anything other than “SimCity”. That’s the risk you run when rebooting an old, storied franchise – people have in their minds an idea of what a game with that name is supposed to be, and if you fail to meet their expectations in any way you open your game to criticism.
11/03/2013 at 14:52 trjp says:
If they’d called it “not Sim City just a city building game which is online all the goddamn time” the more entitled people (most of the internet) would STILL be bitching
“Why are they making this not Sim City shit when I want a new Sim City game even tho the one I already have works just find I WANT IT AGAIN – NOW NOW NOW – and my bread won’t fold either, DAMN YOU!!!”
etc. etc.
12/03/2013 at 02:51 Kamos says:
Oh please. Please don’t be entitled to other people’s right to feel insulted by the way EA treats its consumers.
Also, you are precisely the “I don’t give a fuck” type of person that EA counts on to buy their crippleware, and to give them free rein to just do whatever the hell they want at your expense. Just please don’t try to look so smug while using your dunce cap. It looks silly.
11/03/2013 at 17:11 Gibbonius says:
Counter Thought Experiment:
Would EA still have been able to charge the ludicrous £45-£65 if it was called Sim City Online rather than Sim City?
11/03/2013 at 22:11 Klaus says:
Would that make up for server issues, or the bugs in the game?
12/03/2013 at 12:35 anark10n says:
Notice how the reaction to Mechwarrior being an online-game was met with disappointment at the most and no-one complained afterward when the name read “Mechwarrior Online”. No-one is going into it expecting a single-player game or option. SimCity 5 has single-player option. People went into that expecting no hindrance, and they didn’t. An always online requirement is not necessary feature for single-player.
It is not the same as MMOs, where you don’t have to interact with humans if you don’t want to, but in MMOs, the actions of other players will always affect what you’re doing.
11/03/2013 at 14:37 marsilainen says:
But it’s so fun!
11/03/2013 at 14:38 Dextro says:
Someone at EA has spoken out: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/03/08/ea-employee-chastizes-company-over-simcity-in-public-letter/
11/03/2013 at 16:07 Lemming says:
Heh, what I love about that is the genius double meanings behind some of those company slogans:
Think Consumers First: Consumers, not customers. ie. think of them as voracious all consuming money-shitters.
Be Accountable: Be ready to fall on your sword for the almighty EA. You’ll get the blame before any of the higher ups do!
Act With Integrity: Act wih integrity. You don’t have to mean it. Just put on a good show!
Be Bold: Have no fucking shame whatsoever.
11/03/2013 at 16:37 FurryLippedSquid says:
Your interpretation wins.
Hard.
11/03/2013 at 14:40 Brun says:
What you all forget is that the next generation of gamers – people who are currently between the ages of 12 and 18 – don’t care about always-online at all. That generation has grown up with Steam, Xbox LIVE, Apple and Android games, and Facebook Games. The internet has been an integral part of their lives almost since the very beginning – think about that for a minute! These are kids that have had high-speed internet since their first computers, being online has never been novel or special to them, it’s normal. To them requiring an internet connection to do *anything* on their PC/videogaming device is to be expected.
I think a lot of the people that complain in these threads fail to realize that the fundamental culture of the internet is changing, and that that change is being driven by a generation of users whose internet habits and ideas are completely different from their own. That isn’t to say that the situation is hopeless or that we should just stand aside and accept the inevitable, but the fact of the matter is that you are fighting a losing battle here.
11/03/2013 at 14:48 Hahaha says:
Well said. Shame those people don’t read this site.
11/03/2013 at 15:01 Brun says:
Well the other half of that is that so much of the anger stems from the fact that RPS readers just aren’t the primary market for these companies anymore. None of the big players are making games for the kind of people that read RPS these days – they haven’t been since the 90′s or early 2000′s. It hurts even more that those big players have the rights to all of their favorite IPs from their youth, and are now rebooting them in forms that are geared toward newer generations.
12/03/2013 at 03:01 Kamos says:
I’m sorry, but that is like, just your opinion man.
There is absolutely no generation for which crippled software is geared toward. Except perhaps a generation of fools.
So the real reason (see how it works? We can all just throw opinions around) why all this is happening is that gamers from the 80′s and 90′s are old enough to know better, and companies like EA prefer to sell their crippleware to gullible fools – excuse me, less entitled people. Or do you really think all those MMO players are all teenagers?
11/03/2013 at 15:36 Infinitron says:
SIMCITY is a game aimed at teenagers? Are you serious?
11/03/2013 at 15:43 Hahaha says:
You have seen this game right (also any of the other games they put out)? When I first saw this simcity I thought I was looking at the sims and I still think we will see simcity and the sims merging together sometime in the future.
11/03/2013 at 15:47 Brun says:
How old were you when you first played SimCity 2000? I don’t remember when I first played it but I know I wasn’t much older than 12.
That said, I wasn’t referring specifically to SimCity, but to games in general.
11/03/2013 at 16:31 Hahaha says:
No idea, I remember playing a SimCopter demo which I guess came from a cover disk of something.
When xbox (black rectangle box) came out it was good, since then it has pretty much just gone down hill and after seeing the joke that is the PS4 I don’t want to know what they have in store for the next one. This fucking bullshit always connected fuck up has been building in all walks of life for ages in the mainstream and isn’t going to go away.
11/03/2013 at 16:39 Infinitron says:
I was a nerd. Other teenagers didn’t play it.
Hardcore simulation games are aimed first and foremost at people in their 20s and 30s.
11/03/2013 at 16:43 Hahaha says:
Which this simcity is not
11/03/2013 at 16:43 Brun says:
1) You’re assuming that playing games is still exclusive to “nerds.” In the past 15 years that has changed significantly. It’s still a nerdy thing to do, but it’s by no means as exclusive as it once was, and that applies to all genres.
2) I wouldn’t call SimCity “hardcore simulation.” Things with DCS or ArmA in the title are hardcore simulation. SimCity has always been relatively accessible, and it’s still fun as a toy even if you don’t play it optimally.
11/03/2013 at 16:49 Infinitron says:
Very well, let’s wait for a market study showing which age demographics bought SimCity and we’ll see who was right.
11/03/2013 at 16:53 PikaBot says:
A garbage line offered by garbage publishers. Have you actually spoken to people in this new demographic? Their habits are not so different from ours.
11/03/2013 at 17:02 Lemming says:
I know you complain about the daily whippings now, thinking them unnecessary, but in a couple of generations the kids wont know any different, so it’ll be fine.
11/03/2013 at 17:07 Brun says:
I never said “it’ll be fine.” Way to put words into my mouth. I’m just not deluding myself as to what’s driving it. HINT: It ain’t people that read RPS.
11/03/2013 at 18:26 Machinations says:
You’re making, as are these suits – any relation there? – the same mistaken assumption; that the value drivers for younger people playing games is different from older players.
They’re not. The same issues that affect me, affect my 20-year old compatriot, and to a lesser extent his teenage younger brother.
Quality is quality is quality. Shit is shit. To assume that younger generations won’t be able to smell what you are trying to feed them belies yours – and by extension, EA’s – collossal hubris.
I think you will find that the ‘RPS crowd’, which you seem eager to write off as a bunch of out-of-touch neckbeards, is actually quite diverse, and while trending to the more educated, better paid demographics, is fairly reflective of PC gaming as a whole.
You might think the future is Farmville games. It’s not. Just because society has woken up to gaming generally does not mean that hardcore gamers – you know, the ones who have made gaming a bigger industry than Hollywood – suddenly vanished. There is little difference between the tastes – other than the personal, aka I like FPS, I like RPG – of a 30 something gamer and a 20 something gamer.
11/03/2013 at 18:31 Brun says:
1) I never said Hardcore gamers vanished. They’re just becoming increasingly marginalized. The writing has been on the wall for years, how do you think we went from the original Call of Duty to the yearly Modern Warfares?
2) You’re correct that quality is quality. I never said anything about younger people liking different types of games than older people, or being unable to distinguish bad games from good games. I was specifically referring to internet usage, and how much connectivity (enforced or otherwise) the younger generations are willing to tolerate.
12/03/2013 at 03:09 Kamos says:
Are you just supposing this to be true, or are you really going to pull a graph showing that people from the 80′s and 90′s are less accepting of online applications?
Because the only thing that I can see really influencing people to buy crippleware is disinformation or plain old “I don’t give a fuck, it is just a game”.
11/03/2013 at 21:50 Lagwolf says:
Yes, but Steam is not “always on”. You can play games that you bought via Steam without being online. The problem with always on is that it completely unrealistic even in the US.
12/03/2013 at 01:41 D3xter says:
Good thing EA was so instrumental and effective into helping these people realize what these “old-timers” and “doom-cryers” are talking about with the launch of Sim Shitty.
For instance I chuckled at this comment over at Forbes:
“Listened to my son whine and cry at the screen for ~4 hours as we tried unsuccessfully to log into the game. I guess we’re among the ‘some’ who are having connection problems.”
I’m sure his son will have a deep appreciation for Always-Online DRM and Internet requirements in his games henceforth, since everything is “Online” and “Always connected” now…
11/03/2013 at 14:42 Cerzi says:
How about this simple notion: DRM is shitty, blah blah blah, but there’s a rather good game behind it that’s a lot of fun to play?
I, as a gamer, am honestly more concerned about having great games to play than I am about fighting some political battle against the evil empire of DRM-ness.
Now, maybe this all boils down to my feeling that DRM is not *fundamentally* a bad thing, it’s just executed incredibly shitty by certain companies (Ubisoft and EA being the winners here). If it wasn’t for the complete failure of EA/Maxis to provide adequate server capacity last week, this story would not exist, or would at least get a fraction of the attention.
Finally, I think that describing the acceptance of DRM as something Orwellian is pretty ludicrous. We’re living in a time where more and more services go online every day, and the existence of DRM in other medias is not only prolific but widely accepted as just fine.
I’ve never heard anyone claim that users of Spotify or Netflix are submitting themselves to some slavish dystopia. The only real difference between these platforms and Origin is the quality/reliablity of the service. So logically, that should be the real issue of debate.
11/03/2013 at 15:11 roryok says:
I have to pick you up on that point. There is a much bigger difference than just quality. Spotify and Netflix provide an online streaming service, negating the need for you to purchase or store the content you wish to consume. Users are not submitting themselves to a “slavish dystopia” because they can walk away at any time without having purchased anything at all. Origin is not the same thing.
11/03/2013 at 14:46 935Penn says:
Comment will probably be buried, but, DRM aside, I don’t like that EA seems to be pushing the notion that these games are not their games. They are a publisher, EA is not Maxis, and Maxis made Sim City. Just as Visceral made Dead Space 3, and EA didn’t have a part in the creative decisions… never mind the fact they’ll shutter the whole studio if they don’t perform and gobble up another to continue the cycle with. Oh, and the whole “all our games will have micro-transactions and an online element,” mandate.
I’d put even money on a bet that Dragon Age 3 will be announced at the next E3 with a launch day just before the holiday season, and at the DA3 preview, it will be a Bioware game, with no mention of EA anywhere in the credits other than their logo preceding the trailer. All media, all interviews will come from Bioware, it will be championed loudly as ‘a Bioware game’ and EA will be very careful to keep their name from the press, since I believe they know their brand is quickly growing sour.
I think EA and the name game will be their next move.
11/03/2013 at 14:57 roryok says:
You must always remember that in online discourse, (and often in real world discussion) people often defend bad things just to try and seem intelligent. It’s not necessarily that people defending EA and Maxis vehemently believe that this online bullshit is a good thing – it may simply be that they want to be part of the discussion and can’t think of anything smart to say. I woudn’t despair too much about these apologists – I believe the bulk of gamers know the score.
11/03/2013 at 15:04 plugmonkey says:
The sad thing is that EA have had the exactly right idea, it’s just they then chose to pedal it as a bullshit excuse rather than actually use it to achieve their goals.
“Being able to build cities near your chums, create trade routes with them, share resources, be affected both positively and negatively by your neighbours. Ranked leaderboards, cloud-saved cities, perhaps even world-wide events at a later stage? And of course everything is always up-to-date, latest patch, etc. This is all brilliant stuff.”
See, all that really IS brilliant stuff! Put that in, leave the DRM out and anyone who chooses to pirate the game just ends up with a much shallower, less engaging, less interesting experience. A bit like playing Dark Souls in offline mode which, as anyone who’s ever tried it will tell you, is exactly the same but also a complete shadow of itself at the same time.
Having tried hitting us with a stick to get us to do what they want, they are now hitting us with the carrot.
So close, EA. SO CLOSE!
11/03/2013 at 15:14 Kefren says:
I think over 90% of the many games I bought last year were DRM-free. The other 10% were on Steam. DRM is the biggest turn-off to yet another unnecessary purchase on my part. There are so many great games in the world that it is a helpful excuse not to buy a game for me, one of my main purchasing criteria.
11/03/2013 at 15:15 Deano2099 says:
“The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact. I do worry it’s maybe already too late.”
See, this I agree with 100%. Even though I’ll defend EA and this version of SimCity (though the server issues were unacceptable).
Going multi-player only is a step backwards, and the reviews and critiques should take that in to account. But that doesn’t mean the game is broken. It was a design choice. A bad one I think. One that makes it far worse value for money because it’s half what previous games were.
This is subtle and hard to explain, but I feel it should be judged for the fact that it doesn’t have a single-player game, not for the fact that it could have had a single-player game if it had been tweaked a bit.
Going back to MMOs, it’s fine to criticise TOR for not having a single-player mode in a series that traditionally been single-player, but that doesn’t mean it’s broken.
11/03/2013 at 15:20 Theodoric says:
The bit about regional computations being server side is a mechanical objection (and limitation, until they decide to rebuild part of the game) that does have some merit. Of course, it’s not end-all deal either (just probably a bit too much to reasonably expect to be fixed any time soon), and it’s not an argument to defend any upcoming games that have similar system.
Rest of the article I totally agree with. It’s a ridiculous ‘feature’ that only detracts from the game, and it just opens up the game even more to further detractions (like the server issues).
11/03/2013 at 15:23 Hardtarget says:
this article is insane, aside from what’s actually broken about the game just because the game isn’t designed the way you want it to be doesn’t mean the game is ‘broken’, it’s just not what you want from it.
11/03/2013 at 16:02 D3xter says:
Well I didn’t buy it, and will not ever do. Same as I did with D.iablo III. (And I wouldn’t have done it even if it worked perfectly on principle alone).
I also tend to ignore games with Day-1 DLC or overtly much DLC and might get them later down the line when they are complete as a “GOATEE”-Edition.
But I expect you’re not trying to talk to me. :P
Another important argument that people are forgetting is that these titles will suffer under the evil throes of planned obsolescence.
People might be happy that they can (finally) start playing the game right about now they’ve bought about a week ago.
But remember that it is a common business practice to shut down its Online services: http://www.ea.com/1/service-updates
They’ve recently shut down the Online features for “The Sims 2″, a game that according to Wikipedia is the best-selling PC game of all times and only released back in 2004. That people can still play the game isn’t because EA wouldn’t have done it otherwise, but because this kind of DRM luckily didn’t exist back then and would have been the most outrageous thing people have ever heard.
And they are constantly shutting down the Online services for their sports games, I believe they only have a designed lifespan of slightly over a year.
D.iablo III and Sim City are the first of their kind where this is being done to decidedly Offline games, there was actually a third example called “Miner Wars 2081″, but as an Indie developer they didn’t have the market size of these huge franchises and they finally listened to their customer-base and entirely removed it for the Offline part of the game: http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Miner-Wars-2081-Always-DRM-Completely-Removed-Gamers-Rejoice-51649.html
11/03/2013 at 16:15 D3xter says:
But if people don’t put a stop to it with these titles they will be gone forever whenever server upkeep doesn’t seem to be fiscally profitable anymore, of when companies close and change focus.
You won’t be able to see these type of troll messages from the likes of GoG 20 years from now: http://www.abload.de/img/7zoh1ggdpzv3.png where they playfully say:
“Server Problems? DRM-free Sim City 2000 needs no Internet to play AND it’s only $5,99″
Because chances are by then the game might be gone forever, the same way as countless failed or shut down MMORPGs like Chronicles of Spellborn, Asheron’s Call, City of Heroes etc.
It might also be a period in the history of “gaming” that proves to be a black hole later down the lines with a lot of lost and unrecoverable titles: http://technologizer.com/2012/01/23/why-history-needs-software-piracy/
11/03/2013 at 16:17 D3xter says:
On the downside, I am very afraid that the sales numbers of D.iablo 3, which was supposedly hanging around 12 Million copies last time: http://tinyurl.com/c7klfbh although I don’t know how that fits together with their “1 year of World of Warcraft” proposal and a possibly really well selling Sim City despite all the criticism people have accumulated against it will inevitably force us into that direction.
It is really sad that gamers seem to have become the toilets of the consumer industry, that seem to be able to submit to absolutely everything given enough time and seem to be less bound to their word than Judas himself: http://www.abload.de/img/boycott-modern-warfaromj32.jpg
I’ve even seen some of the same type of individuals that otherwise wouldn’t think twice about pirating a game or often “try before they buy” go out and get both D.iablo III and Sim City, because “they couldn’t play it otherwise” and basically rewarding and legitimizing these consumer practices instead of spending money on the games that are really worth it.
And I’m sad to say that it seems to be at least partially working as the publishers have intended.
11/03/2013 at 16:05 Vermintide says:
I can’t help but struck by the similarities of the modern games industry, to the music industry of ten years ago when MP3 players were first becoming popular. DRM is your Lars Ulrich, EA is your RIAA.
The difference is, the audience of the music industry didn’t buy the corporate agenda, and the artists are now (slowly) reclaiming it. It seems like gamers, on the other hand, might be naive enough to swallow it.
11/03/2013 at 16:13 benjamin says:
The game now has two hundred and four 1 star reviews on Amazon.co.uk. There’s some kind of justice in that.
11/03/2013 at 16:19 Iskariot says:
Being a Sim City fan for years I am so glad I decided to skip this game.
I just want to play off line so spare me the hassle of always online DRM.
11/03/2013 at 16:21 Malfeas says:
I saw this coming, which is why I didn’t even think about buying SimCity. So it is with quite a bit of smugness that I have to say:
Yes! A thousand times yes!
Let’s burn EA to the ground and plant the triumphant flag of Indienation! (Please don’t actually do that [or if you do, do not ever, ever mention me (but do send me pics [on second thought, never mind})]).
On a more serious note, for me this is EA’s third strike.
The first one was Spore. I mean seriously, wasn’t that already utterly ridiculous? Wasn’t it, on top of everything the most pirated/shared game of it’s time, just because irony seems to be on our side?
The second one was when their fingerprints got all over Bioware’s work. Suddenly we got less substance, in everything they did, while the marketing got quite a bit better.
Yeah, that’s what I want. Divert the resources to marketing.
And well, here we are. I’ve been skeptical of buying EA games for years. Now I’ll be avoiding their games on principle, unless they rather radically change their treatment of customers to actual respect, rather than that bleeched teeth shark smile of theirs.
Obviously, some non-DRM games may still warrant exceptions, but I doubt they’ll be many.
11/03/2013 at 16:22 elikal says:
This a 1000 times!
I salute you, Mr. Walker! Thanks for saying it so clear and harsh as it deserves. Always-Online DRM is indeed the BANE of gaming and must be fought to the last man and the last bullet… figuratively speaking.
11/03/2013 at 16:26 Charles de Goal says:
I love the photos you used in that article. Perhaps it would have been nicer to credit the authors, though.
11/03/2013 at 16:31 MadTinkerer says:
” It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two.”
Once upon a time, “computers” were large mainframes that you logged into via terminals. And then personal computers were invented, effectively giving everyone smaller personalized mainframes of their own. And then the publishers turned personal computers back into terminals whose sole purpose is to connect to their servers (a.k.a. “the cloud”). Then we all gave in to the cyberpunk dystopia in exchange for iBrainSockets. At some point the events of Robocop and Johnny Mnemonic happened. The End.
11/03/2013 at 16:42 DrZhark says:
I’m curious are those photos from Detroit? or which city is that?
11/03/2013 at 17:19 Blackseraph says:
Someone in these comments said they were from New Orleans.
11/03/2013 at 16:42 kikito says:
My money is saved for Clockwork Empires (which will include no DRM).
11/03/2013 at 21:33 Sheng-ji says:
I am really looking forward to that game – it’s saying something when the page you linked to has edged (£1 to Tim Langdell paid) out my bank from my most visited pages on chrome… check I’m living within my means, nah, drool over a game instead!
11/03/2013 at 21:38 Blackseraph says:
Ho ho.
“No always-online DRM requirement, unlike certain other games we don’t want to mention. You know who you are and your mothers are very disappointed.”
Must say I am interested now too.
11/03/2013 at 16:43 Jraptor59 says:
I agree. Don’t buy the game and they will stop the DRM scams. If you want to find out what the big deal is, turn off your internet and try to play your game. Any game. I like having my game on my computer and being able to play it anywhere, anytime, even years later. If you pay $$ for the game you should have the expectation of being able to play it when you want in single player mode. Check out GoG.
11/03/2013 at 16:47 wodin says:
Well said John I salute you and your kind..Nathan go to the back of the class and write one thousand lines..”Always Online for Single Player games is dumb and I’m dumber forgiving it. I have learnt from my past mistake and will hence forth crusade against always online SP games until I draw my last breath”.
11/03/2013 at 16:56 CantankerousDave says:
Here’s the problem as I see it. It may be fundamentally broken as a game, but that’s not what it’s primarily designed to be. It may have gamelike trappings on the surface, but it’s first and foremost a DLC and micro-transaction sales platform. I’m sure those functions will work just fine once they’re rolled out in mass quantities.
11/03/2013 at 16:59 DickSocrates says:
My reaction to all this is to run away crying and start playing NES and Super NES games again.
Anyone that defends EA for a second doesn’t have the capacity to make such decisions in the first place. There is no defence. By claiming one you out yourself as someone that fundamentally doesn’t understand what’s going on here. Maybe you don’t care, in that case, again, go away because if you don’t care then you have no role to play. I don’t care about motorbikes, no one consults me on the future of that technology.
The only reason EA are doing this is because they want POWER. It’s power for its own sake. They control your game that you’re playing by yourself in your own home! They have their hand on the lever. And this is step one. It’s going to get worse and with any luck it causes a gaming crash. But I fear the majority of people are too stupid and detached from things that matter to do a damn thing about it.
Boycott EA. SIMPLE AS THAT. Are you willing to give up your rights just so you can get the latest game in your grubby little hands? Are you admitting you’ve been conditioned to the point where you don’t actually have any control over your own decisions any more and HAVE to buy every new game regardless of the fact the producers of it hate you and actively work against you at every step?
It is as serious as that, it’s about self-respect and standing up for yourself.
DON’T TAKE S*** FROM ANYONE.
11/03/2013 at 17:01 Brun says:
By claiming one you out yourself as someone that fundamentally doesn’t understand what’s going on here
People might take you a little more seriously if you weren’t so condescending.
Discounting someone’s opinion because you don’t share it is a dangerous way of thinking. You would do best to avoid it.
11/03/2013 at 18:26 FurryLippedSquid says:
“People might take you a little more seriously if you weren’t so /condescending/.
Discounting someone’s opinion because you don’t share it is a dangerous way of thinking. /You would do best to avoid it/.”
*cough*
11/03/2013 at 18:32 Machinations says:
I`ve come to the conclusion you`re either a troll, Brun, or a PR shill. No-one is that stupid, deliberately.
Take care.
11/03/2013 at 18:40 Brun says:
Sounds like you’re someone else that should heed the advice in my above post.
11/03/2013 at 19:00 Machinations says:
Believe it or not, you are the most sanctimonious, pretentious and, yes, condescending person I have read on the internets in ages.
If indeed a shill, you’re not good; if simply dense, my apologies – this is perhaps a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black.
11/03/2013 at 19:10 Brun says:
If I come across as condescending it is not intentional. Also, I’m not shilling for anything. I don’t like this any more than you or anyone else here does. But I’m trying to add something more to this discussion than 9 pages of everyone agreeing with each other while decapitating anyone who puts one toe outside of the “acceptable opinions” circle. Talk about Orwellian – people here are like the damn Thought Police.
11/03/2013 at 19:18 Blackseraph says:
Well come on how do you see your post below as anything else but condescending?
You should take your own advice here, and try to see how your posts comes across for everyone else.
11/03/2013 at 17:12 Alenonimo says:
Why nobody is calling the game for what it is? I’ll say it then:
This game is designed as an MMO.
That’s right. This game plays and act just like an MMO. Turn off the servers and :poof:, no more game. You can play SimCity 4 now, ten years from the release date, but you’re out of your mind if this game will be playable at all 5 years from now.
Now, the fact it’s an MMO is not bad per se, but the game was NOT ADVERTISED AS ONE! Nowhere it’s said the game is an MMO. SimCity players don’t want an MMO. People are being dupped.
11/03/2013 at 17:44 D3xter says:
Except both D.iablo 3 and Sim City are NOT “MMOs” and saying that they are MMOs is baloney and disingenuous at best. Since the features and the requirements thereof deign if a game should carry the “MMO” genre brand and not marketing buzzwords or type of DRM. It’s literally buying into their marketing propaganda.
Both games are decidedly Single Player, but they’re a new breed of single player game that have a built in DRM limiting their use-cases and deigning them to a planned obsolescence as soon as the sequels are out. D.iablo III and Sim City for that matter are the only games that do that for now.
It’s a bad precedent and has to be stopped lest more and more decidedly SinglePlayer games do the same thing and then “disappear” forever at some point like MMOs do when server upkeep isn’t profitable anymore (out of whatever reason) while people can still play Sim City 2000 from 20 years ago without a problem.
Now let’s examine the meaning of the word “MMO” as it pertains to Sim City…
Massive(ly) –> Usually means more than 128 people (often much more) and with a persistent world, Battlefield for instance had 64×64 player maps and soldier persistency mechanics for a long while and it’s still “only” a Multiplayer game (and also always had its Single Player part in being able to play against Bots). In the case of Sim City there are regions that people can play either alone, or share cities with a rather (low) number of other people, usually 2-6 other people.
Multiplayer –> Should be a little more than a few values you could unmarshal/marshal from/into a simple file. You can play alone in Sim City, there isn’t even a “Co-Op” 2-player city building feature or anything like that as far as I know that would require Multiplayer. All new features could be developed as an (optional) Multiplayer mode.
Regions and sharing/trading resources aren’t a new thing, see Sim City 4 from 2003: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimCity_4#Regional_gameplay
As far as I know there were even people playing it in “Multiplayer” like the new “Sim City” that way by simply synching a few of the State/Save-files amongst each other using DropBox, see here: http://community.simtropolis.com/topic/40240-simcity-4-multiplayer-mode/
There’s also a big difference between “Synchronous Multiplayer Games” (you know, what MMOs are using where people run around with each other, form groups or raids and appear with hundreds of other people in a common town or area and states are updated instantaneously to transmit the new positional data based on ping latency from clients to server) and “Asynchronous Multiplayer Games” like Sim City where you can play all by your lonesome, building your city not much minding what other people do, even if they are Offline at the moment and then they get to see what you did when they log in next and get to do the same.
The only mechanism required for this is a asynchronous way to push/pull and merge that data at given intervals depending on how the players want to, e.g. every hour/day/week or whatever. Instead they made it all just worse, by requiring an Always-On connection even if you are playing alone (which most people are likely going to do).
Online –> Yep, forced “Always-Online DRM”, because EA mostly.
As I said, Sim City still is a decidedly Single Player game (that could make use of an Optional Multiplayer Mode which would only need to synch State files with a master server every time in a period of X hours/minutes or even multiple days if the player chooses so, no need to be Always Online for it)
The likely real reason for the use of the “Always-Online DRM” on top of the game is to protect it against piracy and protect their business model of using Microtransactions and get people to buy those, being as it is the only way to modify the game.
11/03/2013 at 17:12 Tom Servo says:
Well said, John! I worry that not enough people are seeing the other dark side of this always online DRM crap, namely that the game can and will be terminated in the future and your $60 purchase will become worthless. You will not be playing this in 10 years, you will be lucky if you can play it in 5 years.
You know EA hates the fact that people play these types of games for years, now they can stop you from doing so to force you to buy the newest one. In the old days, game companies would actually try to make the new version of a game noticeably better than the old one to entice you to buy. Now they will just completely disable the old game to try to force you to buy.
11/03/2013 at 17:19 geldonyetich says:
I’m pretty sure the only way we could get EA to even care is to land a massive class action lawsuit on them, and their EULA has probably done everything in its power to preemptively neuter our ability to do so.
Well, then how about a boycott? Oh, right, all but the vocal minority that cares will trundle along without participating, rendering our attempts at a boycott useless as well.
The sad thing is, it’s not like we’re blameless here. Not with piracy numbers like this. Me, I don’t pirate, but apparently this makes me a weirdo. EA probably looks at the PC gaming platform like we simply can’t be trusted, for every one “loyal customer getting the shaft,” there’s four non-customers who are picking their pocket.
Thus, despite always-on DLC failing nearly every time it has been implemented in a AAA game, regardless of company that makes it, don’t expect it’s going anywhere soon.
In the end, I think EA’s main fault is overcharging for the game. Why are they having us pay $60 for a game that they didn’t expect 4/5 of us to buy the box price of if it’s supported by an online store and requires an always on connection? They weren’t selling us a stand-alone single player game, they sold us a facebook game, and this stand-alone single player game price is unabashed greed.
11/03/2013 at 18:35 Machinations says:
Pirating has gone down a LOT since the 90`s.
I havent pirated a game in over 10 years. I know more console pirates than people who pirate PC games.
Funny enough, this idiotic scheme makes more people pirate, out of spite, not because they cannot afford it – but to get features that they are otherwise denied, like offline singleplayer.
I see there is already a hacked release of SimCity, reportedly working. I`m so glad EA trashed an iconic franchise to trial balloon `games as a service`.
This balloon don`t fly, Joe.
11/03/2013 at 17:24 Don Reba says:
Given that SimCity apparently needs a huge amount of server power to run, it is a near certainty that it won’t be supported for long. And once EA drops support, the game will be completely lost forever, because part of the code runs server-side.
11/03/2013 at 17:26 TechnicalBen says:
And then the apologists arrive. Time to go find some better games instead me thinks. Things won’t change while you work to keep the status quo. So just think about that if you ever meet a roadblock when you fire up SimCity next time.
11/03/2013 at 17:34 Brun says:
It is interesting that, given how often the commenters on RPS ride around their supposedly intellectual high-horses, they only seem to want the comments section to be an echo-chamber where they can all preach to the choir, pat each other on the back, and tell each other how smart and progressive they all are. Oh and let’s not forget, any dissenting “heretics” shall be mercilessly exiled – there’s no room for constructive debate on RPS.
11/03/2013 at 17:36 Hahaha says:
Same as most places online now
11/03/2013 at 17:57 D3xter says:
It doesn’t have that much to do with “echo-chambers” as it has to do with actively arguing against your own interests. Defending this practice (even if you don’t think it’s as bad as it is or as other people make it out to be, but outright defending it) can only logically come from two places.
a) Shilling
b) Ignorance and not understanding the bigger picture
If it isn’t one of the two it is some sort of cognitive dissonance and you need to take a long hard look in the mirror.
If you are a consumer, and are actively defending this kind of pushing negative practices against yourself, there is something wrong with you.
Especially coming after an entire week of the game being unplayable because of it and it still remaining broken.
11/03/2013 at 19:34 darkChozo says:
So anyone that disagrees with your belief on the issue is either acting with malicious intent or just incompetent? Isn’t that just a roundabout, vaguely justified way of saying that you just want an echo chamber?
Personally, I’m avoiding Sim City despite being interested in the actual game because of the clusterfuck surrounding it, but I wouldn’t go and brand anyone who defends the game as a corporate shill (seriously, how many of those do you think there are?) or an idiot. To me, that seems like an incredibly unhealthy attitude to have towards pretty much anything.
11/03/2013 at 20:12 D3xter says:
“disagrees with your belief on the issue”
You don’t have to agree with “me”, you don’t even have to have an opinion on the matter or think strongly about it at all.
As soon as you are starting to actively argument against your own interests though and try saying that “Always-Online DRM” is a very good thing you are at the very least suspect.
What reason would there be to *like* Always-Online DRM? This isn’t about not liking Multiplayer as an Optional game-mode, but literally *liking* that you are being forced to play your SinglePlayer game Online due to Digital Rights Management?
I didn’t even make a statement about the quality of the game, just that.
“seriously, how many of those do you think there are?”
Quite a lot actually, another one got found out recently on NeoGaf: http://www.dsogaming.com/news/eamaxis-employee-gets-banned-on-neogaf-for-attempting-to-distort-the-news-aggregate/
There’s also at least two Ex-EA employees of many years on the Escapist forums that seem to go around every thread in defense of EA, although they identified themselves as having worked for EA: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view/ThriKreen and Sargonas42, he even has the title “Corporate Shill”. :P
There was also the thing about people being hired and paid by positive posts they made in regards to The Old Republic, but that is a while back now.
11/03/2013 at 20:45 darkChozo says:
Mmm, in retrospect I somewhat skimmed over the “outright defending” bit of your original post, my opinion is a bit more muted in that light. I mostly take issue with those who shout down people that don’t jump on the anti-EA train; there’s a number of RPSers who strongly believe that EA (or Activision/Blizzard or Bioware or any number of companies) and everything they do is evil, no exceptions, and that anyone who disagrees is either stupid or is being paid by the company in question. I’d still shy away from generally attacking people who actively defend Sim City on any grounds but directly refuting their argument, but that’s more me than anything else.
As for shills, I’m not gonna say that astroturfing doesn’t exist (though I’m pretty sure a “I work at EA” disclaimer kinda ruins the whole secret conflict of interest thing :P). It just seems to come up unusually often in comments regarding anything that the hivemind doesn’t like, and it comes off as a bit spurious. I’m pretty sure there are better ways for EA to spend their money. Like, say, on Sim City servers.
11/03/2013 at 18:41 BrunIsAnIdiot says:
Brun Said:
“It is interesting that, given how often the commenters on RPS ride around their supposedly intellectual high-horses, they only seem to want the comments section to be an echo-chamber where they can all preach to the choir, pat each other on the back, and tell each other how smart and progressive they all are.”
The moron also said:
“People might take you a little more seriously if you weren’t so condescending.
Discounting someone’s opinion because you don’t share it is a dangerous way of thinking. You would do best to avoid it.”
Fucking hypocrite.
11/03/2013 at 18:47 Brun says:
I fail to see the inconsistency, but thank you for further proving my point.
11/03/2013 at 18:48 Blackseraph says:
You seemed to miss the point actually.
Point was that you are a condescending hypocrite.
11/03/2013 at 20:37 Goggalor says:
Every single method of preventing piracy is ineffective, save one: actually making a game people want to buy. But humans are quite averse to admitting that they are wrong, and thus publishers shove DRM into their games instead of tackling piracy in a sensible and mature way. If you want to help prevent piracy you don’t cripple your product, you make it better. You make the product just as convenient as a pirated copy with an added incentive to buy. You stop treating piracy as something horrible and start recognizing that piracy is free advertising for your game.
High piracy rates are entirely the fault of publishers and developers who don’t understand that treating your customers with disrespect and suspicion and giving them bad products are in fact bad things. Frankly, if they cannot understand the basic business principle of the customer always being right, then I won’t shed any tears when they inevitably go out of business. I will instead rejoice.
11/03/2013 at 17:28 shutter says:
Wow, this is probably the most insulting article I’ve ever read at RPS.
You’re an ignorant dupe if you don’t think EA/Maxis is lying about wanting to make a more connected game to hide their dastardly plan to force always-on DRM on the world.
You’re evil and wrong if you don’t want the preserved-in-amber single player game that John dreams of.
Maxis are subjugated minions without the will to make the games they want to make.
The article would be bad enough with all the easily debunked conspiracy theories that this SimCity could easily be engineered into a single player, or that Maxis is lying about wanting to make a connected game.
But at least respect Maxis enough to believe they made their own game (for better or worse), and players the respect that some of us don’t care all that much about fully-isolated single player.
One bad game launch and an opposition to always-on DRM doesn’t justify this drek. It’s unworthy of this site.
11/03/2013 at 18:39 Machinations says:
“The article would be bad enough with all the easily debunked conspiracy theories that this SimCity could easily be engineered into a single player game..`
Do you mean like how its already been cracked, is on the popular torrent trackers, and peope are playing it single player RIGHT NOW
how does it feel when you realize youve been lied to outright by a company, to the point you are defending their anti-consumer practices with misinformation
there are no complex server side caluclations, that was all nonsense to convince people like you always online was required
11/03/2013 at 20:25 MentatYP says:
And people bought that line of BS hook, line, and sinker.
11/03/2013 at 18:39 Don Reba says:
It isn’t a matter of respect. If you followed many developer-publisher relationship stories, you’d know that it just doesn’t work that way. Developers don’t get to make “their own games,” with only rare exceptions.
11/03/2013 at 19:14 shutter says:
I’ve yet to see a single credible dev claim they get bigfooted on this stuff of this magnitude (it’s always someone claiming they know someone who hates their big evil publisher).
I don’t doubt EA said something like: “Social’s really big right now, it’d be awesome if the game had more multiplayer/social elements”, but I find it totally believable that Maxis went off on their own and decided that and always connected multiplayer simulation would be really cool (and frankly, that’s a pretty cool idea, execution aside).
The idea that Publishers are all cartoonishly evil, and dev’s all secretly agree with ‘insert personal game design fetish here’ is just pure fantasy.
12/03/2013 at 10:45 Thoric says:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/81646-EA-CEO-We-Squandered-Acquired-Studios
From the mouth of John Riccitiello himself.
11/03/2013 at 18:44 BrunIsAnIdiot says:
Idiot.
11/03/2013 at 19:08 Vesuvius says:
hahahahahahaahahhahahahahaahahahahahahahaahhaahahahahahahahahahaha…….
I mean, seriously?
EA have made it their clear policy with every property and developer they own that they want to churn out new releases every year, that they want as much DLC as possible, and that they have built-in planned obsolescence for many prior releases.
Look at EVERY game they’ve released in the last several years. Look at all the recent MAXIS stuff- look at the sims- how piecemeal was that product? How deliberately split up was it so as to make the whole package cost hundreds of dollars?
You’re telling me that these choices aren’t part of a coordinated effort to monetize (despite the fact that the EA higher-ups have SAID IT IS), and that instead this is all artistic vision?
Come off it.
11/03/2013 at 19:41 wodin says:
Not sure what to say about that…erm..damn I can’t find the words to respond to your rather erm…speechless…thats what I am speechless.
11/03/2013 at 17:38 Squirm says:
I just decided to give the site another visit for the first time in a month, and I’ve got to say.. It’s wonderful to see not a single Social Justice article on the front page, and you’re actually calling EA out on this shambles too. A good start to regaining the trust lost from so many recently.
I’m sure someone will be mad at me for this message, just to let you know, i don’t read the comments section here so if you wish to attack me or whatever, I won’t know about it.
Have a nice day all!
11/03/2013 at 17:47 Sheng-ji says:
I thought you didn’t read the comments section ;)
11/03/2013 at 17:39 Wut The Melon says:
Despite fully agreeing with what you’re saying, there’s a single problem: people are completely fine with it. The vast majority doesn’t care that they’re paying more than they should, that the game doesn’t work, hell, that the premise of its system (always-online) is corrupt and will only lead to even worse situations in the future…
I have tried my best to convince my friends they shouldn’t buy this, but really, no-one cares enough. Unlike every other industry out there, game publishers can get away with releasing intentionally broken products or questionable business models. Skyrim on PS3? How about second-hand PC game sales? I know, the latter don’t exist – despite European law ruling that it should be possible.
The games industry will continue to ignore customer rights so long as the vast majority of customers don’t care. It might be a while before that changes…
11/03/2013 at 18:19 fish99 says:
John Walker, you have my respect for having the balls to post this. And you’re 100% right.
It’s sad to see so many people mindlessly repeating EA PR here.
11/03/2013 at 18:40 Machinations says:
especially that line about complex server side calculations
11/03/2013 at 18:31 JonClaw says:
Great write-up!
I paid for this game and because GamersGate is too busy spinning on EA’s phallus to offer refunds, I’m sitting here with a broken leg.
If only there was a time machine, I’d go back and bitch-slap myself and steal my credit card.
11/03/2013 at 18:36 Klingsor says:
Best article about SimCity I’ve read so far. Kudos RPS!! Won’t buy it until DRM has been removed.
11/03/2013 at 18:42 MaxMcG says:
Hear, hear. I couldn’t agree more.
It’s all the more clear once you play the game how this “always online” is just DRM and nothing more. There is no reason AT ALL that they couldn’t have had the same online features without the necessity for “always on”.
What annoys me the most is this: EA & Maxis have been blatantly and very deliberately lying to me and every other person who bought this game.
Well, never again. They can shove their free game where the sun don’t shine.
11/03/2013 at 18:50 Sparkasaurusmex says:
Just checked out metacritic’s page for Simcity. The scores not as bad as I hoped, but I learned one thing from this visit.
I really need to get Walking Dead.
11/03/2013 at 18:52 katinkabot says:
I pre-ordered this like a real idiot. Victim of my own nostalgia. I missed all of the hullabaloo this past week because of work but was annoyed and frustrated along with every person.
I was able to get in no problem and had many hours of uninterrupted gameplay and thoroughly enjoyed them UNTIL I bankrupted a new city in an attempt to solve a regional power problem. The city actually breaks itself. It pauses the game and doesn’t let you continue unless you pull out bonds or raise taxes or gives you the useful suggestion of starting a new city(NO. I want to play THIS one). Since I did’t have that many people living there to begin with – taxes were a no go. It was the bonds that got me into trouble in the first place so that was out. So I thought, ‘oh, no big deal. my other cities are fat with cash’. Tried gifting it. Nothing. Because game time is perma-paused the gifts won’t come through so you have a completely useless city.
In researching on the forums, it appears this is a growing issue – griefers are going to public games and doing similar things. Locking out several cities rendering regions worthless. Mine was a private game with only me playing it. What I did was admittedly lazy – but it’s my game and I NEVER expected it to literally break the game I was playing. WHY WOULD SOMETHING BE DESIGNED LIKE THAT??? I can understand the no-cheats in “competitive online” game play but why can’t other regions lend or gift money??? IT MAKES NO SENSE. So for the always online b.s. like the global economy(whatever), leaderboards(serious whatever) and f-ing achievements(OMG WHO CARES) – you can’t give a bankrupt region more money because they “lost”. TLDR: The DRM literally breaks the game.
11/03/2013 at 19:03 Metssr says:
Although I am a great fan of Simcity so far, bought Simcity 3000, simcity 4 and 4 de luxe.
and I do not understand every single word of this article as I am not native English speaker.
I Think I understand the meaning of this article and I also think I will not buy a game that only can be played won the internet. I just want to play this game on my pc and perhaps, perhaps when I am good in it I would try te play with others, But I don’t know anyone around me who plays this too. And I don’t think I’d like to play wit strangers. So sorry EA end also sorry for me (because what I have seen on Youtube is quite nice) this game is not for me. I also wonder about the rather smal city’s I see on You Tube, is that because this are all Beta version video’s?
Pity I have to play my Simcity 4 on a laptop as my desktop pc now is an iMac.
11/03/2013 at 19:04 rihanna720 says:
If you are looking for an online work from home then you are recommend checking out the hugely popular site below. It’s definitely the most-financially rewarding I’ve ever done.You can Work anytime. Don’t waste your time any more, Start Earning Money from Home with Google now! http://tw.gs/YbVcey
(Go to site and open ‘Home’ for details)
11/03/2013 at 19:15 wcanyon says:
I think the better question is: why the fuck are you dumbshits buying games that have always-on DRM? Do. NOT. Buy. Those. Games.
Only way they’ll learn.
11/03/2013 at 19:29 Jenks says:
The only always-on DRM single player game so far was the fastest selling game in PC history. Since that failed horribly, what is our next plan of action?
11/03/2013 at 19:32 satsui says:
Perfect statement. I love the Settlers 7, but it pisses me off beyond belief at the same time to the point where I pirated my own game that I own. I got sick of Ubisoft telling me when I can play MY game depending on how their servers feel. “Feel like playing? Sorry, we’re upgrading our servers!” Well fuck you too. EA hasn’t learned from Ubi’s mistakes, but maybe this will teach them a lesson.
11/03/2013 at 19:35 Cardinal says:
Kudos to RPS for defending our way of life, and our right to bear grudges.
11/03/2013 at 19:40 bar10dr says:
Amen to that, please stop supporting games like these with your money people.
11/03/2013 at 19:41 Jenks says:
I can’t seem to reply to any of the pirate apology squad who are replying to my posts a few pages back, so I’m just going to say this as a blanket response to all of them.
It doesn’t matter what you believe. Deny whatever you’d like to make yourself feel better. The publishers know piracy is an enormous problem. Always on DRM, microtransactions, DLC, they’re all publishers’ way of fighting piracy, and they’re here to stay. Do you think disc based DRM is gone because you complained enough? No, it’s gone because pirates beat it, easily. Now they’ve found something that works. We are in the very first stages of this transition, but make no mistake, it’s coming, and it’s because of pirates.
11/03/2013 at 19:47 Brun says:
And what those “apologists” are trying to tell you is that those things are going to end up backfiring on the industry. Always on DRM, microtransactions, and DLC will only be here as long as the paying customers are willing to tolerate it. If the industry pisses enough people off then the paying customers will buy their games elsewhere, and then all they’ll be left with are the pirates. The whole approach is like cutting out your heart so you won’t die of a heart attack.
11/03/2013 at 20:03 Machinations says:
‘the pirate apologist squad’
whatever; I have a salary that is large enough that even my penchant for buying games that I never play is not noticed by my wife (over 300 titles on Steam – A REASONABLE FORM of DRM) Petty insults and assumptions like yours don’t bother me; I find you childish, painting all your ideological opponents with the same brush.
First, if SimCity intended for this always-online to combat piracy, it clearly didn’t work, because the game has already been cracked and is up with people playing single player RIGHT NOW
Two, there is no need to require draconian always-online DRM to ensure your game is not pirated heavily. Steam has been succesful in this regard. Making game purchasing easier than downloading a pirated copy has had benefits. There is reasonable DRM, and then there is always-online.
This was obviously done to make sure that the inevitable `Somewhat Larger Towns`DLC and various cosmetic DLC`s do not have to compete with free content generated by consumers via mods, as well as to provide various tie-ins and no doubt a microtransaction store to sell little widgets.
This is not being done to stop piracy, genius. This is being done to squeeze more money out of the franchise.
Edit: Brun, thats an eminently sensible comment. The cure is worse than the disease, so to speak.
11/03/2013 at 20:05 SkittleDiddler says:
“Always on DRM, microtransactions, DLC, they’re all publishers’ way of fighting piracy”
No, those things are all publishers’ way of maintaining control over their products. Control in the form of data acquisition, install limits, interaction oversight, prohibition of user creations, and consumer binding.
You don’t understand the difference between anti-piracy and anti-consumerism. That’s why you’re getting shouted down here.
11/03/2013 at 20:34 MentatYP says:
The music industry has gone through a similar trajectory and is further ahead of the curve in that respect. They did the DRM thing. It didn’t work. Whether they realized that people hated it or they figured it didn’t make them more money the way they thought it would, they eventually scrapped it and now we have DRM -free music downloads from all the major digital music retailers. If the gaming industry goes the same route of universal DRM I’m confident they will eventually end up where the music industry is–with a system that does less to alienate paying customers just to force a few pirates to pony up (and make no mistake: not each pirated game equates to a sale lost).
11/03/2013 at 20:35 Don Reba says:
DLCs and microtransactions have little, if anything, to do with piracy. They are ways of leveraging human psychology, which favours instant gratification and is woefully bad at calculating long-term returns.
11/03/2013 at 20:38 x1501 says:
My god, you’re ignorant. Combating 90% global piracy rates? The global piracy rate for PC software has been hovering at 42%, with most of it happening in poor emerging economies that have been the driving force behind PC software piracy for decades. In developed countries, the rate is significantly lower. In the United States—world’s largest software market by far—the piracy rate is in fact at the lowest level of any nation in the world, at 19%.
The numbers, by the way, come directly from BSA—an anti-piracy organization that assumes that each copied copy represents a direct loss of sale, and whose piracy estimates have mostly been criticized as exaggerated, not the other way around. Stop talking nonsense.
11/03/2013 at 20:42 Jenks says:
@SkittleDiddler
I understand exactly what the two are. If you think EA’s *motivation* for all this shit is anti-consumerism and not anti-piracy then you’re insane.
@Machinations
Why are you trying to convince me that always online DRM is bad? I can’t even imagine how sweet the deal would have to be for me to buy any of this garbage. I’m just placing the blame where it belongs.
@Brun
This stuff is all selling well enough that it’s here to stay. Don’t kid yourself.
@x1501
The most compelling numbers I’ve seen have come from 2dboy, a developer with no interest in fighting piracy. I haven’t seen other estimates far from that. Also, we’re specifically talking about games, which are entertainment, not software as a whole, which includes an enormous amount of legitimate business purchases. Also, way to be an offensive twat.
11/03/2013 at 20:49 Brun says:
This stuff is all selling well enough that it’s here to stay. Don’t kid yourself.
Is it? D3 may have done very well in initial sales but revenue from the RMAH has, by all indications, been much lower than what Blizzard hoped for. That tells me that people ended up paying for a game thinking it would be one thing, and then quit after they found out it was a different thing. Possibly because the quality of the game had to be compromised to shoehorn the microtransactions into place. In SimCity’s case people seem to be finding that out sooner rather than later.
11/03/2013 at 20:55 Machinations says:
If they try to sell an expansion, they won`t sell a quarter of what D3 did. Most players have quit, and in essence they have killed the franchise; between the always-online and the AH `progression`.
Oh, and you skipped the part where always online DRM doesnt work and Simcity has already been cracked. Is it because it torpedo`d your entire `argument` I wonder..*
*said argument composed entirely of pocket lint and chewing gum
11/03/2013 at 21:52 SkittleDiddler says:
Call me insane then. You can also call me 100% correct.
Maintaining as much control (“software as a service”) as possible over the products they sell has the sideline benefit of allowing publishers to freely implement draconian DRM policies, all the while claiming astronomical piracy rates without providing verifiable evidence.
If piracy didn’t exist, we’d still have DRM, microtransactions, and DLC.
11/03/2013 at 22:09 Jenks says:
I will have to disagree with you on that point, but it’s not something that can really be proven either way. I find it hard to believe, though, that a business selling products and services would go out of its way to harm its paying customers. It seems far more likely that they are collateral damage in their fight against those stealing from them.
11/03/2013 at 22:15 SkittleDiddler says:
Well, keep in mind that when I say “anti-consumer”, I’m saying it with quite a bit of personal bias. The publishers obviously don’t see things like Day One DLC or forced online as anti-consumer, but I certainly do.
12/03/2013 at 03:52 Kamos says:
First, nobody is “stealing” anything, the thing you’re referring to is called “copyright infringement”. Second, the people who make decisions in corporations like EA are not infallible, their job is to make decisions to maximize profit (such as putting DRM in games) based on the information they have. It does not mean the information they have to make decisions is necessarily correct.
Actually, all those people you have insulted on the previous message thread (and before I forget, fuck you too!) were giving you reasonable reasons why piracy does not immediately convert to lost sales, and they also pointed out that the article you yourself have cited comes to the conclusion that DRM isn’t effective to reduce piracy, which is a little detrimental to the point you’re trying to make.
12/03/2013 at 10:09 Ich Will says:
Jenks, is it a coincidence that with only one or two minor exceptions, every game which features always on has some form of microtransaction store.
It’s nothing to do with piracy and by believing that you are buying into the biggest piece of bullshit propaganda in the industry. Its not about piracy, when I worked for EA, my best friend was on their anti piracy team. EA gave exactly zero shits about their opinion, which incidentally came to the conclusion that an open modding scene was the most effective form of DRM. But EA dismissed this because, shock horror, they can’t earn money from mods.
What they can earn money from is “in house mods” sold through a tightly controlled store. Always on is part of their real money microtransaction model, which requires each “mod” to shake hands with the server. Don’t believe me, go boot up Dragon Age Origins, the first game to utilise this system, buy some DLC and then disconnect from the internet. Boot up the game again and try to use your DLC. That was the system in it’s infancy.
You seem to have a real problem with swallowing what you’ve been told from corporations, you wrote on the other page that you believe sales figures from drugs companies, who treat their fines for disclosing false data as just another tax.
One day, you’ll grow up and realise that companies lie all the time. Maybe then you can direct your frustration in an appropriate direction, until then, prepare to have your opinion dismissed by those who recognise it for the ill informed, naive simplistic view that it is.
12/03/2013 at 15:05 Jenks says:
“and before I forget, fuck you too!”
wait, some dipshit said fuck you, so I facetiously said fuck you back, and you’re holding that against me? This place sure is full of bright people.
Too many idiots to argue with. See you in 10 years when everything is always on, and the only games left for you to steal are indie.
12/03/2013 at 15:32 Jenks says:
Ok I needed to respond to this, because it’s just such a stupid post laced with insults.
“You seem to have a real problem with swallowing what you’ve been told from corporations”
I’m sorry to break this to you, but corporations haven’t said always online is to fight piracy. It’s common sense. If anyone is swallowing the corporate line, it’s you. Please provide me with all the anti pirate propaganda Blizzard and EA have used to justify always online.
“What they can earn money from is “in house mods” sold through a tightly controlled store. Always on is part of their real money microtransaction model, which requires each “mod” to shake hands with the server. Don’t believe me, go boot up Dragon Age Origins, the first game to utilise this system, buy some DLC and then disconnect from the internet. Boot up the game again and try to use your DLC. ”
Are you kidding me? You’re making MY argument. Why would it need to shake hands with the server when you load it up if not to fight piracy? You bought it already. What benefit could there possibly be of forcing a check on the server if not to fight piracy? Good lord. I can’t believe you would spit this at me, and then call me naive.
12/03/2013 at 15:44 Ich Will says:
Any injected code in EA’s current DLC model must shake hands with the server to run. This is not an anti piracy measure because it is not an active check. No data about what is asking for a server check is sent. Go download a copy of DA:O from pirate bay and notice how your freshly acquired pirated DLC works just fine.
What you can’t do is create your own mods because without a very good knowledge of programming in assembly, you can’t request that check and the framework will not load your assets. Pirated content created by Bioware works just fine.
How do I know this? I fucking build the damn thing! I know exactly what my motivations were for creating the software in the way I did. They certainly were not anything to do with piracy, thank you very much, and they were to “secure in-game ecommerce”, in plain English “To make people buy DLC through the game”
You really are a laughing stock, aren’t you
12/03/2013 at 17:56 Kamos says:
“wait, some dipshit said fuck you, so I facetiously said fuck you back, and you’re holding that against me?”
You really are a fucking idiot, just calling everyone a pirate because they do not agree with your absolutely nonsensical arguments.
12/03/2013 at 19:52 Jenks says:
I noticed you ignored the part where your entire argument was that blaming piracy was the corporate line, and yet that’s entirely made up on your part. And again, your opinion is irrelevant. This shit is coming whether you like it or not, no matter how many retarded insults you throw at me.
@Kamos
The only people I’ve called pirates are pirates. The only people I’ve called pirate apologists are pirate apologists. There’s this bizarre dichotomy here, where the same people who say “piracy isn’t bad!” then turn around and say “I’M NOT A PIRATE APOLOGIST, I BUY MY GAMES, FUCK YOU!” Sorry, it doesn’t work that way. That’s what an apologist is. Now you can either fuck off, or continue to spit in the wind here. I don’t really care.
12/03/2013 at 23:23 Ich Will says:
I noticed you ignored the part where you told me why a piece of software was written as a factual statement, then I told you I was a core member of the team that wrote it and your “fact” like many of your other “facts” was completely inaccurate.
Oh, and if no corporation has claimed that always on protects against piracy, how come you wrote this:
” If you think EA’s *motivation* for all this shit is anti-consumerism and not anti-piracy then you’re insane”
Whatever your source is on this, is also my source ;) Have fun!
Also I checked, because Shengji and I had a slightly heated debate about swears on the comments. She was against them in general, so I was surprised to see you saying here that she said Fuck You to you. Turns out she didn’t, except in your fantasy world.
I’d like to see you copy and paste a quote from her where she actually says words to the effect of “Piracy isn’t bad”. You must be talking about her because she was who you called a pirate apologist and her who told you that she does not pirate games.
13/03/2013 at 06:34 Kamos says:
Again, Jenks. You are an idiot. You are the one claiming from the very start that RPS defends piracy, that RPS’ readers are “the 90%” (of pirates mentioned in the article you have cited), and it is your fault alone if you are brain damaged enough to translate “piracy does not necessarily convert to a lost sale” to “piracy isn’t bad”.
As everyone has made sufficiently clear already, some of us are actually interested in 1) finding the roots of the problem and 2) dealing with the problem instead of just going full retard mode in justifying DRM like you’ve set out to do.
12/03/2013 at 02:28 adammtlx says:
So you truly believe that the cost of server infrastructure (including the salaries of around-the-clock support teams), the massive PR hit and the loss of sales from people (like me, for example) who won’t buy the game because of the DRM is lower than the cost of piracy? I just don’t buy it.
With one extenuating exception, I haven’t pirated a game in about 4 years. Usually if I pirate a game it’s because it’s an older game that I want to try out before I buy it on Steam or somewhere and I always buy any game I pirate, if I like it. Several years ago when I was a broke student, I pirated games freely because I couldn’t afford them and wouldn’t have bought them anyway. And it’s funny, now that I make a good living I’ve gone back and bought almost every single one of those games. I mention this because I know several people just like me and I bet there are a lot of “pirates” out there like me as well. Yes, piracy has a cost. But I’ll bet it’s a much less dramatic than it’s made out to be and at a certain point the myriad costs of enforcing DRM outweigh the impact of piracy.
We can all wish piracy didn’t exist, but it does. Pissing off your customers to save a bit on your bottom line (still wondering if EA is saving anything with SimCity’s DRM) is prrrrrrobably not the right approach to addressing it.
12/03/2013 at 14:39 Jenks says:
Raph Koster: Always online is not going away.
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/03/08/requiring-online-for-single-player/
Sorry guys. It’s the future of AAA.
By the way, shouting me down will do you no good.
I hate this as much as you do. The difference is, you’re too shortsighted to see the inevitable. If it’s any consolation, there will be plenty of indie games for me to buy and you to pirate.
12/03/2013 at 16:23 Ich Will says:
At risk of pushing Jenks closer to his inevitable realisation that he is actually a cylon, isn’t that a biased source of the sort someone called you out on earlier in the comments. Isn’t this you taking an opinion statement from someone who has a vested interest in making that statement as a fact.
12/03/2013 at 16:54 x1501 says:
Considering that he still chooses to base all his assumptions about the global piracy rates off a single 2008 statement made by a developer (so you know they’re objective statistical experts) of a one tiny 70MB indie game that was arguably too short and low-profile to even justify its $19.95 price tag to begin with, did you really have to ask?
12/03/2013 at 19:58 Jenks says:
There’s probably a ~5% piracy rate and 0 of those people would buy games if they couldn’t pirate anything, plus they only do it because of drm and high prices (there are no cheap games). Oh and all of them actually buy their games after they pirate them, they just want to try them first. Publishers know this and their butchering of the AAA games industry, while seemingly detrimental to the future of pirating games, has nothing to do with pirates.
Wow, that felt good. I can see why you guys enjoy this so much. It’s being a child all over again, in the land of make believe.
12/03/2013 at 20:27 x1501 says:
I told you the number already. According to actual surveys—as opposed to a dubious old statement by an indie developer with an obvious conflict of interest—the number in the USA is roughly at 20%. Worldwide, the piracy rate is estimated to be at roughly 40%, but the vast majority of software pirates live in low income countries and couldn’t possibly afford to buy $50-$60 games even if they wanted to. So even with the rate numbers that high, it’s obvious that not every pirated copy is a “lost sale” and that most pirated games would remain unpurchased in a piracy-free world. And that’s even without considering such “nuances” like the fact that some pirates do buy some of the the games they pirate, or the fact that pirates who download huge numbers of games usually end up actually playing very few of them.
So shut up or produce a better argument. You remind me of those iPhone game developers who claimed that 80% of their users were pirates when only 10% of iPhone users had jailbroken phones that allowed to illegally downloaded games to run on the hardware.
12/03/2013 at 21:13 Jenks says:
I’m just going to ignore the hostile portions of your post because I’m growing bored with them.
You provided links to estimates of software piracy. Games are entertainment software. There is obviously going to be a much higher rate of piracy for entertainment then there will be for business software, and there is also going to be far more business software sold overall. It’s good information but doesn’t give us anything accurate for this discussion.
I’d guess iOS’s piracy rate is incredibly low because of apple’s closed system and app store. You’ll get no argument from me there. I don’t know anything about mobile gaming really, it’s not my bag.
12/03/2013 at 21:47 x1501 says:
There is nothing obvious about your completely unsubstantiated claim that the piracy rate for entertainment software like games “is going to be much higher” than that for other types of popular software like MS Office or Adobe Photoshop. A copy of Photoshop costs, what, $700 to license? If anything, its piracy rate is probably a lot HIGHER than that of an average game.
More importantly, your objection is irrelevant, as these studies calculate the rate of all unlicensed software installed on PCs in a given year and specifically include video games…
12/03/2013 at 22:11 Jenks says:
Your numbers are irrelevant as they pertain to all software, and we’re talking about games. It’s akin to me saying the murder rate in Detroit is high, and your response is giving me the murder statistics of the entire USA. Come back with relevant numbers or don’t bother.
If you don’t understand why entertainment software would be pirated at a much higher rate than business software then you obviously don’t work in IT.
12/03/2013 at 22:56 x1501 says:
Detroit has a population of less than 800,000, which constitutes less than 0.0025 of the total U.S. population. More than 60% of PC users play games. A bit of a false analogy, don’t you think?
Also, with the self-righteous crap that keep coming out from one of your orifices, I still see zero evidence about games being pirated at a much higher rate than Photoshop, Office, WinRar, Nero, or other popular types of productivity software. According to a recent study, more than half of small businesses in the UK have used illegal software. Do you have any factual evidence whatsoever, apart from that ridiculous 2D Boy source you keep citing? At all? I’m holding my breath here.
12/03/2013 at 23:13 Jenks says:
That’s a lot of irrelevant info you’re tossing my way.
12/03/2013 at 23:19 x1501 says:
My god, you are stupid. 57% of small business piracy is almost 50% above the average piracy rate, not below it. Which makes your entirely unsubstantiated claim about games being pirated considerably more often and therefore driving the overall rate up even more improbable than it already is.
12/03/2013 at 23:21 Ich Will says:
That’s a no then!
13/03/2013 at 06:38 Kamos says:
“I’m just going to ignore the hostile portions of your post because I’m growing bored with them.”
You should change your nickname to joker. Or clown. You do not get to go into the comments section of a site claiming the site and its readers are pirates and then act like a victim.
13/03/2013 at 06:58 RobF says:
Come on, Jenks. You still haven’t managed to explain why if piracy is so damaging, if this 95% piracy rate that 2DBoy reported is such a terrible thing why 2DBoy aren’t living in shacks now eating their own toenails, or why the heads of EA aren’t living in shacks eating their own toenails or Kotick isn’t living in a shack eating his own toenails.
If you’re going to wave this stat around like it’s meaningful, then DUDE, you absolutely have to look at everything else that surrounds it and ALL the evidence out there points to the fact that despite high piracy rates, games make money and in the case of AAA games, make enough money to fund multimillion pound games repeatedly.
So, come on then, Jenks. Explain the games industry to us all and how it works and why piracy is damaging and whilst you’re at it, I’d like a list of games that have been pirated so heavily that the company went under or a company so hit by piracy that it couldn’t sustain itself.
Because as Russ’ old Reflexive piece shows, the conversion rate when you stop piracy is so insignificant as to not be worth the effort. So how is the games industry still standing? How are games still getting made? Why didn’t the industry self destruct when people were passing round C90′s filled with games or cracked disks filled with multiple games or stripping stuff out of PSX games to fit 4 on a disk.
If it’s as obvious as you say it is, if it’s as damaging as you say it is, this should be a piece of piss. So come on, let’s name those companies and those games…
GO!
12/03/2013 at 19:39 Jenks says:
Adam Sessler: Always online isn’t going away
http://revision3.com/sesslerssomething/simcity-launch-ea
12/03/2013 at 20:03 Brun says:
I’d take all of that with a grain of salt. As someone pointed out earlier, the music industry tried clamping down and it blew up in their face, causing even more damage to their business, from which it is only now beginning to recover.
I do think you’re correct in that the situation will likely get worse before it gets better though.
12/03/2013 at 20:57 Jenks says:
Music is easily recordable though, and games aren’t.
Now I’m hypothesizing 10-20 years out, but I think instead of getting better, it will get far worse and the next evolution will be streaming. I think always online DRM is a stepping stone. Bandwidth will continue to become cheaper and more available. At some point, major publishers will start offering both “copies of the game” (if that’s what you’d even call what you get right now) and streaming version, and then eventually cut it off and go to entirely streaming services.
Again, people here will toss insults at me as if I’m the one actually pushing the industry in this direction. I don’t buy games with oppressive DRM, or tons of DLC, and I never pirate. I’m the very last person to blame this on. I have a backlog of retro and indie games that will last me a lifetime. I’m as anti-DRM as anyone here. I’m just looking at the situation objectively. If my vision of the future is wrong, and yours is right, no one will be happier than me.
12/03/2013 at 21:04 Brun says:
Music is easily recordable though, and games aren’t.
Uh, what? I’m not sure I buy that. Producing (profitable) music still takes effort. Besides, you’re dismissing what I said without really addressing the core of my comment. The difficulty of producing music is irrelevant, as the recording industry still responded as though it were a valuable commodity (by trying to crack down on piracy).
12/03/2013 at 22:37 Jenks says:
Brun what I meant was music is much more easily copied. Cassette tapes or sites that rip tracks from youtube right to mp3. The nature of games makes them much harder to do so, and with always online DRM it makes it near impossible. The gaming industry is in a much greater position of power to protect its work than the music or movie industries.
13/03/2013 at 06:45 Kamos says:
“Again, people here will toss insults at me as if I’m the one actually pushing the industry in this direction.”
No, Jenks. People toss insults at you because you’re an obnoxious clown who started by calling everyone reading this site a pirate.
“I don’t buy games with oppressive DRM, or tons of DLC, and I never pirate. I’m the very last person to blame this on.”
And yet, you’re reading this site, which makes you a pirate.
11/03/2013 at 20:04 Nura says:
I agree. Some of the online gameplay is pretty cool in theory, but forcing everyone to play online all the time creates some serious design flaws and inhibits a ton of people from being able to play the way they want to play (being able to destroy their own cities, building their cities to coincide with neighbors who quit playing, etc).
It’s sad to see a launch go so horribly wrong like this again, but I’m in agreement with Nathan that hopefully this failed experiment will be used as a stepping stone for improvement in the way they design online features for games and manage launches like this in the future.
And now, a relevant comic! http://www.virtualshackles.com/392
11/03/2013 at 20:08 bernlin2000 says:
Once again, thank you, writers of Rock Paper Shotgun, for putting my thoughts on this issue into words far more beautifully than I could ever do. Really hit the nail on the head…this system isn’t working and it’s about time game publishers stop pretending it adds value to the consumer.
11/03/2013 at 20:17 nindustrial says:
I’m unsure where I fall exactly in this debate, but, with all due respect, this article is not in fact about the game being “inherently broken.” Instead, the simplified, implicit argument goes like so:
RPS: Always-On DRM is terrible for games, and by extension, PC gamers. Vote with your wallet by refusing to pay for Always-On.
Consumer X: What if I want this game despite the Always-On?
RPS: Then you are an idiot and ruining PC gaming for the rest of us. Don’t vote with your wallet please.
The only thing “broken” about Simcity’s inherent always-online character assumes that you agree with Mr. Walker that always-on should never be used. I may or may not agree, but the game itself is not “inherently broken” in the normal understanding of the term.
11/03/2013 at 21:17 X_kot says:
That’s a good way of expressing my feelings about it, too. The assumptions that underpin this article and the opinions of many DRM critics use a very broad brush when they conflate architectural and mechanical problems. Yes, offline or no DRM would have negated most of the launch problems, but that SimCity would have looked different than the one we have. Perhaps that is the version they envisioned playing, but I’m onboard for the Glassbox one they created, which apparently makes me a simpleton who enjoys signing away rights.
It’s comparable to disliking a film director’s “re-envisioning” of a classic movie – I can disagree with the artistic decisions and describe what I would have liked to see instead, but insisting that sequels and reboots should match my expectations is ridiculous.
11/03/2013 at 22:06 WrenBoy says:
I cant decide which is more annoying, the fact that you dont seem to understand the word broken or the avatar a doormat such as yourself has chosen.
12/03/2013 at 02:29 nindustrial says:
While I appreciate the ad hominem (pleased to meet you too! thanks for sharing your opinion), I’m pretty sure “broken” means: “not functioning properly; out of working order.” And guess what, the Always-On is functioning as intended. Thus, it is not *inherently* broken. It may be broken in the moment because of overload, but that wasn’t the point John was making. I fail to understand your argument.
12/03/2013 at 20:11 WrenBoy says:
It is possible for something to be broken by design which is why arguing that it was designed to behave that way is not convincing. Broken by design is another way of saying inherently broken.
I found your comment annoying because your avatar is at odds with not only your inability to realise that you and others are being screwed over by a large corporation but that you also leap to half-hearted defence of the perpetrator. You can claim that it was rude that I expressed this annoyance, and to be fair on reflection it was overly rude, but it takes some imagination to claim that I was making the implicit claim your understanding of the word broken should be ignored because of your spectacular lack of self awareness. Not all personal criticism can be reasonably described as ad hominem.
11/03/2013 at 20:17 AlienMind says:
“This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity.”
It’s called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome.
“I would like to see them speak out too – they should have their voices heard, let them express their frustration.”
Will not happen. Nobody bites the hand which feeds oneself.
All in all, I’m delighted to see the editor of rockpapershotgun take a stand against this kind of DRM, even though he seems to enjoy other vendor lock in software like STEAM.
11/03/2013 at 20:25 pilouuuu says:
I wish CD Projekt were to make a city simulator… Or that someone makes a Kickstarter for a DRM-free city simulator. I simply refuse to buy this messy DRM crap called SimCity!
11/03/2013 at 20:27 AlienMind says:
EA does everything right in regard to economics. The amount of pieces sold proves that they carefully calculated the amount of people they piss off with their practices so that they are so small they don’t have to give a crap about them.
The only fault this all is happening is the consumer. If you bought Sim City, that’s YOU
11/03/2013 at 20:32 ZephaniahGrey says:
So glad I didn’t buy this and get embroiled in all this garbage. It really seems like the people who defend EA are just the types who want to believe that our corporate overloards, and other authority figures are doing things for our own good. Like children who just won’t accept that daddy might not be perfect.
The other side of the coin is that people should be AWARE of what they’re buying before they lay down their cash. I was excited when I heard about Sim City. I loved the series, but I held off, and learned the ugliness that lied beneath the shimmering skylines. I feel better for having done so. To those that did not, live and learn.
11/03/2013 at 20:35 shivars says:
Hmm for the first time ever I quite strongly DISagree with an RPS article.
For a start its full of the same inflammatory BS words that I hate other sites for; you do not need to tell me what to think or what I am or am not allowed to like.
In fact, one of the best things about RPS are the WITs – which give an enjoyable romp through your experiences of games. Without telling me I should or should not like it.
I love RPS (usually) for the flamboyant and flippant writing style – but this is just tabloid trash flaimbait…or would be if it wasn’t trying to be serious.
btw – nothing is “designed to cripple the game for you” – that might be a side-effect but you’re delusional if you think crippling was deliberate.
So, thanks for your opinion, that’s great. But i can think for myself thank you very much.
And as it happened, I read all the previews and hands on, etc, etc, etc prior to launch – on RPS and elsewhere. I then watched all the launch issues – which are still ongoing. And then I bought it, after launch, on Saturday. And I’m really enjoying it. Yes, I read all the furore, I saw all the isses, and EA/Maxis’ responses to it. And I still bought it, and I don’t regret it.
Thing is, I could care less about firing up SimCity in 5, 10 or 20 years time – there’ll be new games to play then. I have stacks of disks (even floppies) with games I’ve had since I started gaming in the early 90′s. I look at them nostalgically. Do I actually want to play them? No. Not unless they’re re-released on Steam because for me the convenience is worth it. I pay my fee, I get the entertainment, and then I’m finished with it. That’s enough. I don’t need any more than that. And, for me, the convenience of no disks, no scratching/losing them, no losing the manual, no having to put the bloody things in a disk drive (I don’t even have a CD/DVD drive in the PC, just a USB one in the cupboard that comes out at Windows install time).
Launch issues…lots of online games have that. Battlefield 3 for example. Which also can’t be played locally or without EA’s servers. I don’t see anyone hating on that much…
Oh but SimCity is meant to be single-player…well, I don’t much care about that. I am online all the time anyway, and I’d rather not have to worry about the backup, the save files, which PC I’m on, etc, etc, etc. So, online-only single player is pretty much fine by me.
Plus I kinda like the asynchronous dip-in-and-out multiplayer that this provides. Means I can play with friends over days/weeks and it doesn’t matter if my toddler wakes up and needs attention mid-way through a session. Having children puts most multiplayer out of peoples’ reach.
Anyway – I pay for good entertainment and I’m entertained – SimCity is good entertainment. If that’s not enough for you, then fine. It is for me. I don’t have the time for messing about, so sacrificing some fictional ‘rights’ (you don’t think you actually owned the game on the disk did you?) in exchange for convenience is absolutely fine by me. If it’s not right for you then that’s ok too. Yes the launch issues are a bit shite, I get that, but I’m confident enough that they’re being worked on and fixed.
Yes there are bugs in the game. Name a game that doesn’t have bugs? I suspect some/many of the bugs might be fixed in a patch. Again not unusual, while it is perhaps too easy to rely on easy patching rather than good pre-release QA, this isn’t automatically awful.
Having said all of the above, I do think £65 is far too much for a ‘complete’ game – as is £45 for a limited-edition/standard version. I bought from GMG for £36, which is about my upper limit for game purchases. That’s my opinion, it doesn’t have to be yours.
Oh, and yeah I’ll buy what I want thanks. I value your opinion, RPS, and I usually enjoy reading it, but I don’t need you to tell me what i’m allowed to think.
PS; no I don’t work for EA, nor especially like them much. Yes I did play the original SimCity (a *lot*). Also the later ones. Also Tropico, etc, etc.
tl;dr – I enjoy reading that you hate it all. I’m actually not stupid, and yet still happy to pay [some] money for it and enjoy playing it. Which I am doing.
I’ve waffled on enough now. Time to go play something…
11/03/2013 at 20:49 Machinations says:
Battlefield 3 is, you know, a multiplayer game. Designed for multiplayer. If Battlefield had previously been a single player series, and they then released a MP called Battlefield TWO and it was forced online-only with no singleplayer, people would be equally pissed. If you`re making a new IP, make a new IP – don`t piggyback on the name recognition and you`ll get less negative feedback. Even World of SimCity or SimCity Online would have gotten the point across, while still letting them sucker people who remember the original games.
More importantly, your opinion can be summed up as “I dont care about always online, I dont care if other people have issues with it, its shiny and I want to play it“. Congratulations, I guess. Some people find train wrecks entertaining too.
11/03/2013 at 21:01 shivars says:
hehe, I do indeed know BF3 is a multiplayer game, the singleplayer isn’t really worth speaking of. The reason for drawing the comparison is that it is online *only* – in a way that BF2 and the predecessors were not (e.g. BF2 had offline accounts for entirely offline play). In addition, the week following launch was just as much a trainwreck…as in it was largely unplayable online as I recall. Still there is no downloadeable server component for BF3, nor offline/LAN play. Yet very little hate.
And you’re half-right about my opinion – my opinion is that SimCity’s current state (launch load issues aside) is fine for my needs, so I will buy it and play it and be happy. My annoyance, and the reason for my extended rant, was really to vent at RPS. I usually love their journalism, but this article is – in my opinion – the lowest form; it does what RPS usually are good at avoiding and tries to tell the reader what is and what is not a valid opinion.
I.e. RPS usually presents information, alongside their opinion and some witty banter. I like that, as do many. And even though many agree with this article, its not the same; it’s “stuff is bad, you must hate it or you are stupid”. This is insulting.
I feel this is worse than RPS’s accusations about EA’s “positioning” of SimCity’s online “features”. pots/kettles/blacks/etc. I actually think EA were pretty open about what the requirements were prior to launch, relatively speaking, and launch instability aside people should have known what they were getting into on purchase.
Anyway :)
(Edit: typos and minor clarity adjustments)
11/03/2013 at 21:25 Machinations says:
to be pedantic, there is a single player campaign in BF3, and there is actually more to do by yourself than there was in BF2 – BF2 had bot match only and they all followed the same pathing so you would find lines of guys 30 deep.
That said, I get where you`re coming from. “I liked it, am I allowed to“ sort of thing. Of course you are. An acknowledgement though that you would have preferred to keep the gee-whiz `new`features without the enforced online-only would help; RPS is more thoughtful by an order of magnitude than other gming sites, and are looking at the larger picture of always online DRM.
And yes, by definition always-online DRM is shit. You can like Simcity and TOLERATE the always-online, but someone coming out and saying “òh yea MAN I LOVE always-online DRM“ is not going to be well received. Its idiotic. Its like coming out and saying I love being punched in the face. Anyways, you clearly did`nt, I am just trying to clarify some thoughts around this.
11/03/2013 at 22:58 shivars says:
raa, thanks for understanding. i know there is SP in BF3, but nobody bought it for the SP. its a loose comparison admittedly, but nevertheless..
i take your point, and agree, and your reasoning is refreshingly nice :) RPS’ usually is, but not in this instance. I agree they usually are thoughtful, and usually love their pieces – hence why i care enough to get involved here (I usually don’t).
always-online DRM is a pain, but i have to say Steam by and large get it right, and I’ve never felt inconvenienced by BF3 either. I guess if/when SimCity’s screws me then i’ll be annoyed – but given that it just hasn’t then i’m still not bothered.
nobody in their right mind is going to specifically love a measure that is intented only to restrict them (which DRM is for). but i do feel SimCity’s online-ness is partly for that, and partly for other things. I think representing it as DRM first, shiny cover second isn’t entirely fair.
but, we all have our opinions, and that’s fine – which was my point – I was happy to pay and be a part of it, fine if others don’t. I just wanted to speak out that hating it all wasn’t the only way. And, well, at the end of the day, nobody *has* to buy it.
12/03/2013 at 09:39 Ich Will says:
I thought your point about asynchronous online was valid too – there aren’t enough games which provide this kind of experience, it’s mostly the preserve of turn based games with play by email modes, and even then they seem more concerned with implementing simultaneous play modes
11/03/2013 at 21:24 Kamos says:
You are the perfect example of what I mentioned bellow in my post.
Edit:
I think a few things should be cleared up.
“btw – nothing is “designed to cripple the game for you” – that might be a side-effect but you’re delusional if you think crippling was deliberate.”
Save game
Normally: save locally, from memory to hard drive
Extra mile: upload it and make it available everywhere
Deliberately crippled: make it impossible to save locally
Online features
Normally: none, unless the service itself requires a connection
Extra mile: provide online features in a single-player game
Deliberately crippled: provide non-essential online features that crash the essential offline service if the connection is lost
Servers:
Normally: use “science” to determine number of users, perform load tests, add a few more just to be safe, preload the game, and most important, don’t create artificial requirements such as “always online” for something that is essentially an offline experience, since that would be just plain DUMB.
Extra mile: if you’re going to be DUMB and require an online connection, design your whole server structure accordingly, with front-end and back-end servers to provide redundancy and make the service transparent, even if specific servers are lagging.
Deliberately crippled: don’t provide preloads, use a handful of (supposedly) monolithic servers in one of the most important PC releases, scramble to provide extra servers once shit hits the fan.
11/03/2013 at 23:03 shivars says:
Except you missed my point – I didn’t go out of my way to “defend the corporation”.
I went out of my way to defend my right to my own opinion, and to point out that it isn’t RPS’s place to tell us what we should think. that’s just as bad.
point out the flaws, fine.
point out where it’s shite, great.
let us make our own decisions, that’s what its normally all about.
my point was about journalistic style, and using myself as an example where a reasoned, not-stupid, seasoned gamer can still be a part of what is hated and enjoy it – for it to be worth the fee and the launch issues.
The problem is people who say I’m not allowed to be ok with that…
12/03/2013 at 00:46 Kamos says:
Of course you’re entitled to your opinion. However, you’d be hard pressed to find any article in RPS that isn’t an opinion piece.
Further, you’re most certainly in your right to buy anything for any reason you like; however, it simply isn’t acceptable that people (people in general, not necessarily you) are pretending that the game that they have bought (a game which can be good, as a game) is not also a piece of deliberately crippled software, something that any self-respecting software engineer would cringe to do if he had the user’s best interests in mind.
11/03/2013 at 20:39 Neurotic says:
Oh for fuck’s sake.
11/03/2013 at 20:57 Jimbo says:
But is it as broken as the comments facility on this website? *sigh*
11/03/2013 at 21:13 Kamos says:
John, as an outraged consumer I’d like to thank both you and RPS for consistently speaking against always online DRM. It is an insidious violation of our rights and an insult to our intelligence.
I too am baffled by people who go out of their way to defend a corporation that deliberately cripples its own products. For this is exactly what EA did when it decided to subvert decades of achievements in technology to create a piece of software that is designed to fail.
Unfortunately, the majority of consumers are people who do not understand the technical side of the story. They innocently parrot the idea that online applications and server loads are something mystical and unquantifiable, ignoring the fact that “serious” businesses regularly do such things without so much as a hiccup.
Simply put, people would not accept this mixture of outright amorality and incompetence if it was towards something they considered important, such as the cars they ride on. Who the hell would buy a car if it was deliberately designed to turn off its engine as soon as it entered a bumpy road, simply as a safeguard for the automaker, which does not want to guarantee the quality of its cars?
Ideally, publishers such as EA would like us to believe that what they are selling isn’t software, but some illusory piece of entertainment, perhaps something akin to a movie, where you go to the theater, pay ten bucks, sit down, watch the movie and then go home. After all, one does not feel “entitlement” if the movie doesn’t suit him.
Perhaps we need to be reminded time and again that Electronic Arts Inc. is a business, particularly one that has grown far too large to care about anything but profit.
It really couldn’t care less about its “fans” – it will give us a nutritious meal just as readily as it will give us spoiled food. And it will try to convince us that it is good for our health, too. In its overdependence on hype, day one sales and cookie-cutter design, anything good EA does is incidental.
EA doesn’t need our sympathy. It does not have a heart that we can either break or mend. Unless we prod it into treating us fairly, it won’t.
(Sorry about the long rant. And sorry for any mistakes, I’m sleepy and english isn’t my first language.)
11/03/2013 at 21:21 Gaff says:
Your rant mirrors my own from a couple of days ago: http://www.gaffonline.com/2013/03/origin-still-adding-value-screwing.html
I strongly suspect more people will read yours than mine, however, but hey, any port in a storm.
I don’t think it’s possible for me to agree with this article more, either.
11/03/2013 at 22:03 Styles says:
Well said, John. Very much agree. There’s no excuse for this and people defending them by saying “oh but they handled it well” are deluded and missing the point.
11/03/2013 at 22:50 JamTheFab says:
Sim City can not be single player/offline but not because of greed or stupidity. Sim City is like a MMO. And Most of the Simulation and game logic is done by servers. Not your PC. The Average PC can not handle both the simulations and the game running at the same time.
It’s like the Xbox is weak bit but replace Xbox with PC in this point. Or at least the average PC. This is like saying the last patch of WoW broke the game so WoW should be a single player offline game.
What you have downloaded is basically the puppets for Sim City and the puppeteers are the Servers.
They’d have to dumb down the simulation. Bring back cars that disappear at the end of streets. And people would claim it’s because EA is greedy and wouldn’t give you the same game unless you use their servers.
You do not have the complete game on your PC. So this game, unless the server code leaks, can not be hacked. It can not be played with LAN or offline. It’s not a full game. It’s a MMO where the game is on the server and you just have a file full of textures, models and sounds.
12/03/2013 at 01:01 Kamos says:
1) What you’ve said is wrong. The simulation isn’t performed in their servers. In fact, people have played it for extended periods of time when their connection failed, only the online features didn’t work.
2) Again, the simulation is client-side. The game itself not working once the connection fails is a “feature” (cough, cough) of DRM.
3) Sim City is not an MMO. It has several arguably non-essential gameplay mechanics that require cities to exchange information, but that in itself is not a reason for it to require you to have a perfect, constant connection to the internet. You don’t need a perfect, constant connection to the internet to send e-mail, do you?
4) The fact that you cannot save games locally and that the software fails without a connection even though it makes very limited use of it means that it is crippled by design.
“Sim City can not be single player/offline but not because of greed or stupidity”
Yes, it can be single-player. And no, it isn’t, but precisely because of greed and stupidity.
Sim City was designed from the ground up to ease naive consumers into believing an internet connection is necessary and accepting something that is crippled by design (crippled in the sense that someone went out of his way to make sure it wouldn’t work), for the benefit of no one but EA itself.
12/03/2013 at 05:55 TheD says:
NO!
The fact is that people have played for 30 minutes after the server has gone down has proven that it does not use servers for the game logic!
The simple fact is that it would cost a huge amount of money to own and run remote computers that are faster than a PC and the fact that they do not charge a sub fee proves that they are not doing that!
Also any game that tops out at less players than TF2 is clearly not an MMO!
11/03/2013 at 22:58 Mman says:
One thing I can say for always-online DRM is that, as it makes games almost literally unplayable on my connection even when the servers aren’t down, it certainly makes my purchasing decisions much easier.
11/03/2013 at 22:58 bit.bat says:
So are we angry that the game has always on DRM or that the DRM is not working very well?
The reason why I ask is because I think that complaining about the technical problems of this particular DRM case (problems that will probably be smoothed over relatively soon) undermines the larger issue of the existence of DRM in the first place. As the article rightly addresses, would everyone be happy if it existed but worked flawlessly (ok maybe without the playing on a flight part)?
12/03/2013 at 01:09 Kamos says:
I wouldn’t be happy.
If I told EA that it is ok for them to deliberately cripple their software in their pursue of profit, I would basically be giving them an incentive to cripple their products in all sort of inventive ways.
Isn’t it enough that we have unwitting EA defenders calling people “entitled” and “idiots” if a product they paid for doesn’t work? When did it become acceptable for companies to sell things that are designed to fail? Or to blame consumers if a product they pre-ordered, thinking it would have been designed and developed like any other software (that is, to work) is delivered as crippleware?
Consumers shouldn’t be blamed and called “idiots” if a company sabotages its own products!
12/03/2013 at 00:03 Grey_Ghost says:
If they ever do make this a truly compelling single player game I will buy it, as it holds no interest to me in it’s current form.
12/03/2013 at 00:41 malkav11 says:
Mr. Walker, thank you. There can be no excuse for this nonsense. It’s not redeemed by it being fixed to the point where it works most of the time for most people. And unfortunately, far too many people simply shrug and profess not to care or actively support it by making facile excuses about “inherently multiplayer” games that are nothing of the sort, or falsely equating situations like MMOs and other dramatically less severe forms of DRM (which are nonetheless wasteful and unfortunate).
12/03/2013 at 00:56 alilsneaky says:
Thanks John Walker for speaking up for the consumer.
It sounds like the only normal thing to do for an industry aimed at representing and informing the consumer, but you are probably one of maybe 5 game journalists who bother. (the rest I can only assume are too deep in the gaming industry’s pockets)
It’s especially nice to see so much passion in your words, as this IS a really big deal.
I’m also glad that I’m not the only one who feels deeply offended by these practices and tactics, it may be too late for dlc and online passes, but we have to make a stand somewhere…
At anyone defending EA over this, SHAME ON YOU and fuck you for your ‘as long as I get mine’ mentality.
12/03/2013 at 00:58 mr_merriweather says:
Sorry guys, but I bought Sim City. Not because I love EA, or think always-on DRM is a good idea, but because I’m an urban planning enthusiast and really, what other options are there for me video-game wise? And before you suggest any, I assure you I’ve tried them, and the new Sim City is better than them all.
Yes, this means EA will not receive the message that I don’t like always-on DRM. That’s because I like city simulator games more than I like games without DRM. I’m not some dupe who is eating whatever is fed to me by a video game corporation. I’m merely expressing my strong preference for city simulator games. What if Sim City failed–would anyone bother producing another city simulator after the big one flopped? Maybe that’s a worse outcome for me than having all my games require an internet connection. I find that to be reasonable–you may not.
That’s why I find this article nauseating. Yes, I get it, DRM is annoying and bad, and EA really screwed this up. But people buy video games (and things in general) for many different reasons, and to satisfy many different preferences. That’s what a market economy is all about. While there’s plenty to critique there, the empowered consumer narrative isn’t a critique but a feature of the market. I’m as empowered as anyone else, yet I didn’t do what you wanted me to do. Nyah nyah.
Now there are boycotts with moral implications, but I don’t really find this to be one of them–but maybe that’s why I chose to buy the game. Those of you who are boycotting may feel differently. I don’t really get it, and find it rather myopic, but whatever. Let your preferences be known! The shit fit everyone has thrown has certainly gotten EA’s attention, so kudos for that.
12/03/2013 at 09:00 Mattressi says:
To me, the article wasn’t saying “DON’T BUY THIS GAME OR YOU’RE FEEDING THE MAN” – it was simply saying that it is moronic to defend the DRM. And it is. By all means, buy the game if you don’t care about the DRM (or if you do, but you care more about having the game). The problem, for me, are the apologists – the ones who come on and say “but it needs always DRM”, “everyone in the whole world lives in a western 1st world country in the northern hemisphere, in a central city apartment; internet is always really fast, never capped and always stable – so DRM is fine”, and “I welcome our benevolent overlords”. This is what I saw the article complaining about. So long as people don’t kid themselves into thinking the DRM is in any way beneficial to them, there is no issue.
I do hope there are enough people out there who will make a stand against always-on DRM. I have nothing against you, but people like me simply cannot play games that have always-on DRM (at least, not reliably) and when there are lots of people saying “who cares” about DRM, companies will keep putting terrible DRM in their games.
12/03/2013 at 01:24 yrrnn says:
Dear John,
Never change.
12/03/2013 at 01:27 Deano2099 says:
I think my problem with this article is the hyperbolic language. ‘Broken’ is a binary state. Something either works or doesn’t, if it doesn’t, it’s broken. And when SimCity launched it was genuinely broken. And then they fixed it.
Now it’s a lot of things: flawed, a mess, a travesty, whatever. But it’s not broken. Broken is what it was a few days ago. I’d rather keep the granularity of language there and differentiate between the two states.
12/03/2013 at 03:54 Toupee says:
I’d love to play Sim City. I really would. It looks really fun. I’d drop 50 bones for it in an instant.
But no, not in this state. I believe any argument I can possibly make has already been presented in this essay. EA, the moment you remove this ridiculous constraint, I’ll buy your game. Hell, I’ll even buy it thru Origin if I have to. But I will not buy it like this.
12/03/2013 at 09:27 Captain Hijinx says:
” it’s it’s it’s… It’s all bollocks.”
I love you John.
12/03/2013 at 11:00 Hmm-Hmm. says:
People’d better heed this because otherwise we will be seeing much more of this. We’ll see more of this, sure, but customers can influence these matters simply by deciding what to purchase.
12/03/2013 at 11:45 soapgoat says:
businesses should not be ‘let off’ by consumers for violating consumer rights and using practices that are downright anti-consumer… a simple apology does not ‘fix’ any wrongs that may have happened but people will ultimately forgive and forget anyway.
DRAW A FUCKING LINE IN THE SAND AND SAY TO YOURSELF, “NO!”
NO! i believe this shit is unacceptable!
NO! i will not support this!
NO! i will not be a part of this economic system!
NO! i will not show you sympathy for selling a broken product and apologizing on the internet!
NO! giving me ‘free’ shit will not make up for anything!
DO NOT! expect them to ‘fix’ things later.
DO NOT! expect an apology to mend anything.
DO NOT! expect there to be unanticipated affects of unacceptable business practices.
DO NOT! expect a business to give two fucks about you after they have already taken your money.
DO NOT! forgive or forget!
i wish people would learn to be better consumers, rather than just being blind consumers who buy into this shit and complain about it in hindsight.
ea does not care what is written about them on online blogs, and they do not care about opinions customers have. opinions are not part of the economic system at work, and they will never be. opinions do not show up on marketing feedback data, and they do not show up on financial statements. opinions are statistically irrelevant in the long run and cannot be easily accounted for.
12/03/2013 at 13:35 Scratches Beard With Pipe Stem says:
Question about another possible “broken” aspect: Can I sell it used? (I have the limited edition DVD.)
If I uninstall it from Origin, will a buyer be able to install it OK? (This is my first Origin game, so I don’t know how used sales work.)
12/03/2013 at 14:36 Strangerator says:
John Walker just became my favorite person at RPS. Truth to power and whatnot.
12/03/2013 at 15:48 clucktock says:
This article was pretty insulting. I’m one of those gamers that was really excited about the prospects of Sim city. I support the always on DRM in this particular case, and for that I’m apparently a self flaggelating fool with no foresight. This article started as an attack on EA and maxis and the sorry state of the launch of this game. That’s cool, I get it! But it ended with a tirade about gamers who like the game and want to defend it. Not cool.
12/03/2013 at 15:56 deke913 says:
” I support the always on DRM in this particular case, and for that I’m apparently a self flaggelating fool with no foresight.”
For that ..yes. Liking the game is not the problem. Supporting nonsensical self serving DRM does indeed make you a fool. No one wants to believe they are ignorant, but it happens every day.
12/03/2013 at 18:06 Kamos says:
The game you’ve paid for is both a game and a piece of software. Sure you can enjoy the game itself, but you should also be able to recognize that it is a crippled piece of software. It was not designed with your best interest in mind. The problem, then, is that far too many consumers deny this, somehow defending that EA reducing their rights is somehow a good thing.
12/03/2013 at 15:56 Chumbaba says:
This is the most important article on videogames I have read in years. I have felt for years that we, as consumers, are getting less and less while being repeatedly told that we are getting more. The truth is that we don’t own the games we pay for, we often get no media (it’s on steams and clouds and the games will be gone when those systems shut down), even when we do get the DVD, the software is incomplete (some files must be downloaded to complete the installation). We are harassed by DRMs. We cannot make backup copies of our legally bought games, we get no boxes, no user manuals, no nothing. It’s all somewhere in the cloud. Multiplayer might be fun but nowadays it means that the game itself can be worse because people will basically entertain each other via multiplayer, chat and other social features. Lands of Lore I bought back in 1993 will probably still be playable fifty years from now. The current SimCity might never be playable in the same sense.
Everyone should read this article. It should be posted and linked everywhere. Walker for President!
12/03/2013 at 17:04 Hahaha says:
Sort out the shills
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1139476
12/03/2013 at 19:15 Kittim says:
1. John Walker, I flipping love you!
2. EA, Ubi et al should go and take a running jump, I can’t write what I really think of the management of these companies because I’d (quite rightly) get banned. Let’s just say it involves the rough end of a pineapple.
These people have zero understanding of their target audience. Grrrrrrr!
I’m going to have to stop now because I don’t want to ruin what should be a nice and peaceful evening.
John, if you up for storming the UK EA office, I’m in*.
*legal disclaimer, this statement is for comedic effect, rather like always on-line DRM, Origin or
UBendUPlay12/03/2013 at 20:31 Joshua Northey says:
John,
First off, enjoy much of your writing and a lot of things about the site generally. That said, while I appreciate your “stick it to the man” attitude, the uncompromising stance you take at times impoverishes your analysis. You don’t tend to always respect the employees and decisions makers at the companies you are excoriating as people with their own wants/needs/desires/jobs. The industry isn’t there solely for the gamers, it is a multiparty relationship. In addition, you seem pathologically incapable of understanding the role consumer behavior, and yes piracy, plays in the video game marketplace.
To get more specifically to the places where you overreach in the piece…
“simply to serve some nebulous notion of…piracy”
Look, like it or not piracy was not some nebulous unreal thing in the world of PC games. Prior to Steam (et cetera) it was a serious and growing problem eroding the revenues of the companies who made games. It still is a force in the marketplace (as evidenced by the major publishers recent actions). You have to understand that don’t you? You do talk to some industry people from time to time? Hundreds of millions if not billions in revenue was simply being stolen, and while it is less of a problem now, it is partially less of a problem because of more integrated DRM. Is that the best solution? Maybe, maybe not…but the problem certainly isn’t nebulous. You had a large percentage of a whole generation of gamers who felt that if you didn’t want to pay for something it was fine to steal it. And as much as people might say “I only pirated games I wouldn’t have bought anyway”, that is BS and you know it is. Only a tiny fraction of the people pirating games are these virtuous pirates only using it to demo things. Most are just out and out stealing because they don’t have the income to afford the things they want, or they would just rather spend the money on beer or fancier hardware. Granted if Bob pirates 100 games he wasn’t going to buy all 100 of them if piracy was impossible. Likely he would only have bought a handful. But you multiply that few hundred dollars a person by the size of the number of people pirating and it is significant amounts of money. Amounts of money well worth trying radical things like making SimCity an always-online thing.
“But no! cry EA and their loyal defenders. The online is there for the player”
I am likely one of those very people you would categorize as a “loyal defender of EA” (despite the fact I am nothing of the sort but am simply someone who bothers to think about things from EA’s perspective). This line of yours is a crock of shit. No legitimate defenders are claiming this and even EA cannot say it with a straight face. The online components are there to protect EA’s revenue streams and do not benefit the player but incidentally (some sugar to make the medicine go down). These minor benefits definitely aren’t worth the hassles involved, and that is tough. Would you like a lollipop to go with your realization that life isn’t all rainbows and unicorns?
But what does it matter who it is “for” anyway? EA isn’t there to make games people like, it is there to make money, and I hate to break it to you but so are most of the indie studios you so cherish. Making games people like is a means to an end. It is a business. Is that so hard to understand? Maybe 15% of the industry is actually choosing passion over success at any one time. You really ready to condemn 85% of the industry? Not coincidentally the studios choosing passion over business sense are frequently the ones collapsing left and right and delivering garbage products (SotS 2).
Recently I had to fly for business on short notice and because of that the ticket cost twice as much. Is that pricing policy there for my benefit? No it is not. But that is the way of the world. When you buy a car it has a bunch of custom parts you need to buy from the car maker instead of generic ones that would serve just as well and be cheaper to replace. This is not because that is better for you, but because it is better for the car company! You understand that right? Businesses and their customers have BOTH cooperative and adversarial aspects to their relationship.
“Rights as consumers”
People don’t have rights in this metaphysical sense. Study some ethics. Your rights begin and end where the people of your society and its law says they do. They most certainly don’t extend to the right to play SimCity without having to log into some EA server. Do I have a right to get an airplane ticket at a price I can stomach, or a car with generic parts? I do not. I have a right to enter into fair exchanges with the people who are making products. To the extent I do not like their products I am free to take my dollars elsewhere. What I don’t get to do is say “well I wanted this car with only generic parts, but they won’t sell me that so now I am just going to steal the one they do offer.”.
“Always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone”
It is an advantage to EA and its employees dummy! They are a member in this relationship. The gaming universe doesn’t just consist of players and reviewers, it also includes…you know…the actual people/companies making the games.
“I feel very bad for the developers at Maxis”
Why? They likely knew exactly what they signed up for. Moreover I bet if you offered them a chance to make the game again with or without this always online component, but discounting their salaries to make up for the lost revenues to EA, most would keep the always online. Ask some of them would they rather make what 85%, 90% as much but have no online-DRM and almost certainly they will take the money. Everyone always wants better things when it comes as no costs to them, but actually make people realize those costs and the responses soon change. Heck give gamers a chance, I would love to see an experiment (that would never happen for obvious reasons) where some company releases a game at say $60 with no online DRM and $50 with it. Which one do you think would sell better? Want to guess? I have a guess.
Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too. But life isn’t like that. There are costs and benefits.
Just to be clear my wife and I have been just as frustrated with the game as you. This implementation certainly was disastrous, and makes one question the wisdom of the whole course of action. But you can understand why they might have thought it was a good idea FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE. It certainly wasn’t a good idea from their customer’s perspective, but that isn’t the point.
Anyway, in the future it would be great if you could perhaps think a little more and seethe a little less. I realize the seething is what garners clicks and advertising revenue, and being vociferous at the expense of even-handedness or truth is a tempting way to go if you are a journalist. But in this regard you are just like EA, selling out your principles for a few extra dollars. Try to remember that once in a while and you will be a better writer and person. There is plenty of room to criticize EA without making them out to be an insane agglomeration of evil doers.
$0.02
12/03/2013 at 21:16 Jimbo says:
Quite. The hysteria and willful ignorance in these articles is getting a little bit embarassing frankly.
The game is broken because it’s broken (which is unacceptable). It isn’t ‘inherently broken’ because it can’t be played on a plane. They don’t owe that functionality to anybody.
I choose not to buy games with always-on DRM, but I can do that without pretending I don’t understand their reasons for using it.
14/03/2013 at 03:23 RobF says:
“EA isn’t there to make games people like”
I’m really glad we got that sorted, man. Come on, you’re being absurd here – utterly, utterly absurd. You can justify *anything* with “it’s business, guys” and it doesn’t make something less reprehensible or less stupid because it’s a business and businesses exist to make money.
You’re really, sincerely, arguing that we should take the needs of a giant multimillion dollar corporation into consideration before we consider whether something is good for us or good for society as a whole and you’re really, sincerely, justifying this with “because it’s business” ? Really? That we should just accept things they do because it’s business and we don’t have the rights to argue about it but we do have the right to spend our money elsewhere?
You can do better than that, man, and I hope you do because that’s a load of hateful toss.
12/03/2013 at 22:25 Barchester says:
I imagine EA replying with something like, ‘Impressive. Most impressive. Obi-Wan has taught you well. You have controlled your fear. Now, release your anger. Only your hatred can destroy me.’
13/03/2013 at 14:04 scritty says:
The main point isn’t even the DRM. It’s the fact that the logic of the game in so many areas JUST DOESN’T WORK. Simoleons are lost, weird limits placed on buying energy or shipping waste or whatever, shops restocking with no need of industry (and no other players – and at ZERO cost to your “mini city” ) People leaving work from home” A” and returning to a completely different house.. Home “B” and then repeating this randomly every day, pathfinding for traffic terrible. Waste not clearing, cash limits “sticking”.
The logic of the game is just plain BROKEN all over the place. The list could go on and on and on. For the first 90 minutes you are thinking
“This is a good game. Looks good, if the servers OK I’m going to enjoy this”… Then WHAM the logic somewhere trips you up – and often it’s a game ending error. Nothing to do with servers or online – logic issues – these are pure and simple game logic errors and LOTS OF THEM.
As for online multiplay. Sharing a zone is a nightmare without some sort of “mind control” over your fellow players.
Everyone has to build at the same rate for this to work. and display co-ordination and co-operatiion over the long term – consistent communication and really playing “one way” that would need to be pre decided before the game begins.
It almost requires separate coms software and tracking to get this to work – even then, if a player stops playing, wants to experiment, or comes across a problem and doesn’t communicate quickly – your own “city” (tiny village) is most likely on a downward spiral to collapse as a result. And this happens…every game.
Rely on someone to provide your power? Well make sure he or she is playing and expanding at about the same rate and at the same time as you or BAM – it goes out of the window. Same with waste – same with EVERYTHING. You need almost superhuman co-ordination to get a 15 player map to any decent level using multiplayer. It’s darn hard with 3!
Then you realize why goods appear from no-where at zero cost. Maxis knew the game logic was bust and hid 1/3rd of the issue by making these phantom products for “C” districts to sell. But didn’t apply the same “bodge” fixes to “I” or “R” (perhaps becasue that would have let the cat out of the bag too early as far as botched game mechanics go)
For me the idea of global market multiplayer seems quite atractive. I would go online for that for sure. It WOULD bring a new facet to the game. I would hope it was optional. But that is academic. It doesn’t work – and it’s not just a “little bit” broke – go deep enough into any facet of the game and it will unravel into a mess of faulty logic and counter intuitive reactions from your Sims.
My two pence worth is Maxis “shoe horned” multiplayer functionality in sometime mid 2012 to justify always online DRM. And botched the logic..BADLY. I’d like to say probably at the request of EA – but I have no idea whether that would be true or not.
The sad thing is – all of this worked (and still does) with Sim City 4. A ten year old game that works almost flawlessly to this day and is what I’m playing on my other monitor as I type this.
17/03/2013 at 13:31 Blackberries says:
Thank you for saying this, John (and RPS). It’s a relief to see a journo actually speak out against this – it seems most websites and publications have sort of just accepted invasive DRM as a necessary evil and valid design choice.
30/04/2013 at 21:49 Jay Marz says:
Thank you John.
This game has ended up being a complete waste of time and money. EA should be stripped down and sold for parts.
11/03/2013 at 20:24 jrodman says:
You must not be paying attention.
This isn’t a multiplayer simcity. It’s the same single player simcity with some badly designed multiplayer features bolted on. These features are bolted on to justify the always-online DRM and the “social” windows dressing. Read through the reviews. No one’s talking about the greatness of the multiplayer, because it’s not really a multiplayer game.
You could maybe design a multiplayer sim game (I contend this is a bad idea, but don’t let me stop you from trying) but this is not it.