Results 681 to 700 of 1374
Thread: The SimCity Thread
08-03-2013, 06:21 PM #681
haha you guys....
Nalano, my point is, as gundato points out, that EA will make more games and will presumably want their paying customers to buy them. Contrary to your expression above they do want to make money so presumably they want to keep their customers. So if their customers display dissatisfaction with their products (or services) then it would be profitable for them to adjust.
Of course, it's no guarantee since EA could well be staffed by dicks and genuinely want to just ruin everyone's fun. My own theory is that they are pushing always-online and DLC and microtransactions in a really blatant bid to turn gaming into a verifiable service and so get their way and so maintain control, force customers to pay even more money even more often and so on and so forth.
If their paying customers stand up and say no then perhaps they will listen. Maybe.
@gundato - I'm with you on Dark Souls being a good example. I am not with you on burning down houses. Forcing people into something they do not want. As if the ultimate goal SHOULD be always-online and people just need to be bashed over the head until they submit. I do not believe that turning games into a service is in the benefit of us as consumers. I do not believe forcing us to be connected to the internet is in our interests. As it stands, I am confident that in a few years we will not be able to play SimCity 5 even if we want to, because the servers will be shut down. EA is literally trying to force us to buy every new iteration of their games.
Last edited by SanguineAngel; 08-03-2013 at 06:25 PM.
08-03-2013, 06:32 PM #682
"But then you're holding up progress for the rest of us gamers! I wouldn't have ever gone online for any game ever had I never been forced to! And it's their game, so it's their right to decide how you play it! And now IF you can even play it too!"Virtual Pilot 3D™ NEVER NOT SCAM!
08-03-2013, 06:48 PM #683
Take Diablo 3. Ignore for the moment that it is in the Diablo series and just think of the genre: Pretty much EVERY game in that genre is best summed up as "Okay on your own, maybe. REALLY fun with friends and other people". In fact, one might even argue that such games just shouldn't be played by yourself and tend to be much more of a slog that way. But lots of gamers will refuse or will say "I'll wait until my next playthrough" on every playthrough. By at least forcing them to consider multiplayer (because, let's be honest here, the internet connection aspect isn't an issue in this day and age of broadband and DD), they are much more likely to try something new.
I do think though that gamers aren't really ready for this though. If I were a big publisher, I would approach it as follows. For argument's sake, let's assume I am making an ARPG like Diablo or Torchlight:
Integrate everything in the context of cloud saving and achievements
Have an always-on game with a multiplayer community
Would have the same impact, but would be a lot more stomachable. The problem is that the two biggest pushers for this (EA and ActiBlizz) are trying to push their own platforms too.
In fact, I wager a 10 dollar GoG game to you sanguine: Assuming MS really is embracing Steam (as things seem to be), within two years they will have at least announced (if not launched) a game that will do exactly what I just said. And it will probably be accepted.
But yes, I don't think all games should do this. Diablo 3 makes a lot of sense. Sim City, not so much. The Sims? Very much a perfect fit. But I do think this is something that should be pushed and investigated because, for a wide variety of games, this is a wonderful idea.
Although, I also think that a "games as service" might be cheaper in the long run for people who like to play the latest AAA MP games and would probably result in more frequent ("free") DLC. But I also don't trust anyone out there to get that right as the only devs I would trust to not screw us over, Valve, are grossly incompetent when it comes to meeting deadlines for deliverables :p
08-03-2013, 06:50 PM #684
08-03-2013, 07:13 PM #685
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
Q1: what would a person who was once burned by wacky DRM policies do:
a) give another 60 euros for the chance to be slapped in the face again and have no normal retaliation options; or
b) fire up a torent client and get whatever his HDD can grab, freely, knowing he doesn't need to be ashamed of the crooks who burned him when he was honest ?
What does your basic understanding of marketing can tell us about this situation ? A or B will rather happen ?
Last edited by tadada; 08-03-2013 at 07:19 PM.
08-03-2013, 07:26 PM #686
Unable to play game because of online requirements: I suspect the consumer would probably avoid buying games with online requirements until they had a stable connection. But, if they didn't have a stable connection to begin with, they weren't in the target demographic.
Unable to pirate the game (the common case): They would buy the game and/or throw a huge hissy fit. I cite how many pirates on warez sites during the launch of the first Mass Effect on PC ended up posting a variant of "Screw it. If this crack doesn't work, I am just gonna buy the game"
Unable to use the copy they didn't pay for because they somehow can't convince Blizzard of something simple: Throw a hissy fit and tell Blizzard they won't give them any of the money that they weren't gonna give them anyway. Also, go on the internet and scream rants in the form of a philisophical debate. :p
In all seriousness, yes, if someone does have their experience ruined by a DRM model they are unlikely to want to buy a game using said model again. Unless the game is really good or something changes along the way.
Which brings us to the simple math of DRM models. The DRM Model is "good" if the following holds true
(Effectivenss at Limiting Piracy During First Week or Two of Sales) >= (Perceived Inconvenience to Majority of Players) + (Impact due to whinging of players who probably pirated the game anyway) - (Quality of Game)
That is why most gamers don't throw a huge hissy fit over Mass Effect PC (Activation Model Securom) and instead focus on how bad Spore was (exact same Activation Model Securom :p). MEPC had a much higher Quality of Game, so people were more forgiving.
And Steam, which actually has most of the same problems (arguably even more) is generally ignored because the Perceived Inconvenience is much lower ("That DRM model doesn't require me to authenticate every time I start up. I just happen to already be connected to the servers to talk to my friends through Steam Chat").
And GoG, which claims to be DRM-free but does have a very mild form of it. The DRM model has almost no perceived inconvenience (people expect to have to log-in to download a game or a patch) and, combined with a rabid fanbase (of which I am a member :p), it limits piracy.
The problem with Diablo 3 and SC5 are that the Perceived Inconvenience is VERY high, there is a lot of whinging, and (in the case of D3, since SC5 is unknown right now) the quality of the game was less than desired. Although, one can argue that D3 had "good" DRM since there was virtually no piracy for the first few months.
Last edited by gundato; 08-03-2013 at 07:29 PM.
08-03-2013, 07:49 PM #687
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
- Brighton, UK
Whilst I'm looking forward to playing this and enjoyed the sample I got in my half done tutorial I have now been booted out of said tutorial because I had the audacity of following the tutorials own advice and viewing another city.
I am now told that no servers are available Not exactly what I want when I get home from work on a Friday, have been looking forward to this all week. I'm off to the pub and hopefully I'll have better luck tomorrow.
08-03-2013, 07:55 PM #688
Never mind :)
Last edited by gundato; 08-03-2013 at 08:35 PM.
08-03-2013, 07:58 PM #689
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
How can you tell me that, on page 35 of a thread with people talking about not being able to play a bought product, u forgot "Real Inconvenience to Majority of Players" from your formula ? Real, not perceived, when u can't log into a server that's a real situation, not just subjective perception of the fact.
And "failure to follow basic business conduit in case of product failure".
Last edited by tadada; 08-03-2013 at 08:18 PM.
08-03-2013, 07:59 PM #690
The trick is to play at 4:30 a.m.
But you're gonna need some STIMULANTS to do that. Meth is pretty cheap, so that's probably your best bet. But you'll probably also want some downers to balance that out so you can sit still and mayor. That's where the shot of whiskey, the pint of beer and the three quaaludes come in. At that point, you'll probably be a bit confused, so further bevel the world's edges with a pinch of ketamine and you should be good to go.
Until everyone else wakes up and logs on.
EDIT: I forgot the crack... Best to space that out between the other things, to taste. You'll strike a balance eventually.
Last edited by Smashbox; 08-03-2013 at 08:03 PM.
08-03-2013, 08:17 PM #691
And the latter has absolutely nothing to do with the model, but one could argue it is "perceived inconvenience".
Also dude: Just because nally and shoop like to attack and scream at everyone in every post doesn't mean you need to. Mellow out a bit.
08-03-2013, 08:32 PM #692
08-03-2013, 08:35 PM #693
08-03-2013, 08:42 PM #694
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
Let's study that "Real Inconvenience" vs "Perceived inconvenience" we seem not to agree to, you'll see what wonderful lessons that's telling us.
"Perceived" is something a subjective individual comprehends of a real fact.
But based on that only you can't know if the fact being perceived is real or not. We're only humans, right, we mistake and distort.
So, suddenly, we lost the certitude. And the consequences of that fact. What only remains to be dealt with is the perception of "poor, misguided souls".
That, in plain english, is "We don't care if we * them, we only care if some of them actually realize it".
See the difference.
See why your formula was incomplete?
It might cover the publisher's calculations nicely, but does not reflect the whole picture.
Last edited by tadada; 08-03-2013 at 11:18 PM.
08-03-2013, 08:47 PM #695
Which is why I used the word "perceived" because PR is most of the battle. Even the various RPS articles on ubi-drm'd games (and RPS has a full hate-on for Ubi) generally acknowledge that said DRM is much easier to stomache with a multiplayer game than a singleplayer one. Same mechanics, different perceived inconvenience.
That's why Steam is so accepted (I can't help but think I have already said this...): It has most of the same limitations and "problems" of the activation model DRMs (add to things that you can't resell it, whereas I could sell you a copy of Mass Effect PC or Spore with no problem), but Steamworks DRM is widely accepted because people don't feel as inconvenienced because "I was already talking to my friends/already had the client open."
Again, I use "perceived" because that is all that matters. GoG uses DRM. Plain and simple. But most users refuse to accept that because of great PR and the fact that said model is very unobtrusive (unless you are a freak who is terrified of having even a single cookie or saved password on your home computer...). So you might argue there is a "real inconvenience" (I question what is "real", but whatever), but all that matters is what people perceive. And they perceive no real inconvenience. Ergo, in my half-assed equation, GoG would have something close to zero for that operand.
08-03-2013, 09:01 PM #696
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
Tell me that you're gonna sell me a copy of D3 and then I'll really loose my temper. :D joking.
Let's recapitulate: on my dreadful Christmas trip I could not play D3 (neither on the copy bought by my wife or on the copy recieved as a gift, both fully paid copys) not because blizzard actually, physically interdicted me, but because I perceived it's interdiction wrongfully.
But wait, could I or could I not play it?
And, for the loughing stock of the internet, the problem is not that players could not play SC5, but that they understood that they can't play it.
If only the perception of the product matters, the PR, not actually making a god damn game playable and enjoyable, what industry are you on?
Entertainment or the business of fooling people ?
Last edited by tadada; 08-03-2013 at 09:14 PM.
08-03-2013, 09:04 PM #697
Can't you guys just start a DRM thread?
08-03-2013, 09:05 PM #698
I've suggested it multiple times...
08-03-2013, 09:07 PM #699
- Join Date
- May 2012
The Stockholm Syndrome in here has reached critical levels.
It's not that it's "perceived" that needs to be forced to change, it's that the thing we perceive needs to change for our perception to follow. EA need to change their service (IE get it working offline or online) before we will perceive that it is worth £60.
For those who paid £60 and got nothing back (it does not work), I am all for them asking for a refund or asking for a working service. Mind you, EA and the customers can choose one or the other. AFAIK you get very little time to make the choice, as too long and a refund is no longer allowed (but the service must still be improved) and too quickly and you can argue that your allowed time to improve the service.
Last edited by TechnicalBen; 08-03-2013 at 09:10 PM.
08-03-2013, 09:10 PM #700
- Join Date
- Mar 2013
Last edited by tadada; 08-03-2013 at 10:35 PM.