EA Offering Free Game to Users After SimCity Launch Problems

An anonymous reader writes "The SimCity launch earlier this week was a complete disaster. Single player games that require an Internet connection to enable forced multiplayer features (as well as acting as a form of DRM) is bad enough, but then to not be prepared for the demand such a popular franchise has, well, that's just dumb, and Lucy Bradshaw, EA's general manager for the Maxis Label, has admitted exactly that." They did not provide much details, but supposedly anyone who has SimCity now should get "a free PC download game from the EA portfolio." They are unrepentant about the always-online requirement though.

Comments

Too little, too late

[dreamchaser]

EA has been producing crappier and crappier games and screwing over customers for years now. Their workers operate in near sweatshop (ok I wax hyperbolic, but it's not good) working conditions. They could give me their entire catalog for free and I still would never buy another one of their future titles.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't pay to be a beta tester, and get an old game as a "reward'. Continue to ask for refunds, and dispute bank charges. Games shouldn't be rentals.

Re:Too little, too late

[Penguinisto]

So in other words, EA is saying: "we're sorry you discovered that our product is complete DRM-ridden shit, so we want to allow you to download any of our outdated examples of complete DRM-ridden shit from our online catalog!"

I'm thinking that a lot of otherwise unconcerned folks are discovering the hard way that maybe DRM is a bad idea?

Nah - too much to hope for.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

What's interesting is the date they've set for the claim:

On March 18, SimCity players who have activated their game will receive an email telling them how to redeem their free game.

That date is over a week away, and almost two weeks from the initial release: why would they set it so far ahead? I guess the logical explanation for it is to allow for people who ordered a copy via snail-mail, but the cynic in me wonders if they're trying to bulk out the sale numbers with "look, it now comes with a free game, and you've got ages to join in! Please buy it! Ignore the bad reviews, think of the other game you'll get for free!".

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, how dare they expect a game to work at all on day 1! What a bunch of assholes!

Re:Too little, too late

[History's Coming To]

This is why I've simply decided not to buy another EA game. Battlefield 3 was the final straw for me - 3 downloads of around 2Gb each in the first three months? Any you have to download them to continue to play online? And the patches required are only a few Mb and the rest is DLC which you have to download whether you want to pay to have it activated or not?

To top it all, when I tried to contact them to see if patch-only downloads were available (I'm on a slow connection that 6Gb of downloads would swamp) I was told I didn't have the right date of birth. I ended up having to use the UK Data Protection Act to get hold of my account details, and sure enough my DOB was correct. The data also included "customer offered 15% discount" - which was news to me.

I give up , I'm simply not going to buy another £40 coaster from them, I have enough of those.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Games shouldn't be rentals.

Well, yes, but if tens or hundreds of millions of people support that business model, then it's going to succeed. The way to once again have games that don't require someone else's permission to play is to buy those kinds of games, not the kind that are DRMed out the ass..

You get what you ask for.

Re:Too little, too late

[History's Coming To]

Nice to know the employees are treated well. Any chance of asking them to do the same for their customers?

Re:Too little, too late

[adunstan]

I have to honestly say, it's quite a shame, because I played this at beta and I queued to play it at Gamescom, and at its heart I actually thought it was a very good game that had so much potential, and I still do think it looks like a pretty decent game, but forcing the always online is just something I don't want, and I just couldn't justify paying what I felt was completely overpriced compared to every other PC game on release.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

So EA should have hired millions and millions of "beta testers", i.e. all the customers, and then paid them to test the load on the servers?

Re:Too little, too late

[spire3661]

It an unrealistic expectation that the game be made in a such a way that the offline use-case isnt ignored outright? This game was designed so that it cannot exist without EA servers, absolutely rubbish game design.

Re:Too little, too late

[Cito]

A triple A game company that gets it right is companies like EgoSoft who removed all DRM from their X3 franchise and has already announced the new X3 sequel will not contain any form of DRM at all.

DRM only hurts legit players and lags them up, making games unplayable for legit customers. And cripples PC gamers and PC's

There are quire a few triple A game companies that know DRM is shit and does not help at all against piracy and it only hurts legit customers.

People who buy SimCity 5 are total morons if they buy it knowing the DRM it has, cause in a couple years that 59 dollars goes in the toilet when EA unplugs the login server for SimCity 5.

they've already killed game servers as little as 2 years old in the past. Making money spent on the game totally useless.

Anyone who defends companies like EA or Ubisoft are just ignorant of the facts, and it's those 2 companies that are destroying PC gaming the most.

If I had a choice between piracy or selling my company to EA, I'd more than welcome the pirates. Cause Valve already published a study that games without DRM piracy HELPS sales, due to word of mouth advertising as well as most pirates will pirate for the single player action and fall in love with the title and buy it for online play or coop play or to support the developers in general if they enjoy the game as a try before you buy. Which was published by Valve that piracy helps pc game sales.

it's only companies that use draconian DRM that continue to lose money and eventually blame piracy when it's their own company shooting themself in the foot (See Ubisoft's CEO blaming piracy for last years sales drop, when in fact it was most their games requiring always on DRM such as AC series, Anno 2070, and most everything else they released this past year)

Re:Too little, too late

[Goaway]

Games shouldn't be rentals.

But they are going to be, because this is the one and only form of copy protection that can actually work. Publishers are not going to give that up any time soon.

Re:Too little, too late

[Mycroft_VIII]

I don't expect perfection, but I do expect basic functionality. My fault for not looking into the game better I suppose, but Sim City has been a single player game for entire life of the franchise till now and to buy it and find out even THAT doesn't work?!?
    Sorry, I could understand it taking a few tries right at release, when the main spike hits, but to take three days to log in just to play single player which should need little to no connection (should be validation the FIRST time you run the game and maybe for the achievement section, and maybe optional online backup of saves, that is IT) is simply stupid.
    The free game and apology are a good step in the right direction, they need to also public recognize that requiring on-going internet connect for single player is unnecessary and promise not to make that mistake again. Please convey to your supervisors and as far up the line as you can what you're hearing hear from vast majority of posters.

Mycroft

Re:Too little, too late

[dala1]

Most companies just have open beta weekends.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

I am going to buy the next X game, those games are fun as hell and i love the company. Happy to give them money

EA can go fuck themselves, ill pirate there shit 10 times over...ill seed longer.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

A story from the trenches circa 2004 when Simcity 4 was still fresh.

Re:Too little, too late

[jitterman]

I wish I hadn't just used all my points up. I would mod you up to remove the troll - you're simply supporting your employer and giving your point of view. I once worked for Cox Cable, so I know the feeling. In this case though, you're wrong, and I'd like those who browse at +1 to have a better chance to see how an EA employee views the consumer.

I do believe your detractors have a point. EA is not the most consumer-friendly of publishers, and while people do know that patches, etc., will be forthcoming for AAA titles and that the codebase will likely contain bugs, it is not unreasonable to expect to be able to play the game. A feature may not do what it should; inventory or resources or whatnot may not calculate correctly, or a visual glitch might be discovered. But to equate being able to play the game with unreasonable expectations is an exact example of why EA is loathed by many. YOU, as a representative of EA, are part of the culture, and have displayed what I can only interpret as disdain for your customers.

Re:Too little, too late

[B1oodAnge1]

In what way does it "actually work?" There are DRM free pirate releases of every game ever released in the past with "always on" DRM. It may take a few more days to crack, but it's hardly "working," especially when it's pissing off nearly all your actual customers.

Re:Too little, too late

[B1oodAnge1]

I'm going to go buy something from EA just for the fuck of twisting your nuts

Mod this Funny! I'm still chortling at the though of someone buying an EA game to spite someone else. :-D

Re:Too little, too late

[Pharmboy]

Actually, this is one form of copy protection that DOESN'T work. The fact is, I was all ready to buy the game. I actually buy all my games, haven't pirated one in forever. (I'm old, employed, $60 is no biggie).

Now I won't buy the game simply because I couldn't play it if I did, and I don't want a game that forces me to save games online, be online when I play, can't be played on an airplane or in the car, etc. And it will stop working once they get tired of hosting the servers.

I've bought every SimCity game ever made and many other sim games from Maxis. Paid money, not pirated. 1, 2k, 3k, 4, Societies, Sim Copter, even Sim Tower and The Sims 1 and 2, simant, simfarm, and so on. I just can't buy this in good conscience because I don't know if I will be able to use it like I wanted to. And that is sad, since I love their games. Maybe, just maybe, I will buy it if someone comes out with a cracked version, and just use the cracked version. I don't mind spending the money, I just don't like being treated like a criminal once I've given them the money. At least with Steam, I can play most games offline and on different computers.

Re:Too little, too late

[data2]

Has been this way with battlefield 2 as well. Each "update", which seemed incremental, i.e. names such as update_103_to_104.tar.bz2, was a complete replacement and even overwrote your configs if you didn't save them someplace else. Servers were a pita to run as well, but I guess they solved that with their stupid rental model now.

Re:Too little, too late

[Duds]

That won't work because just by buying it you accepted it was a rental. No-one bought without the knowledge that it was server dependant and therefore that the servers (and thus the game) would be switch off as soon as it became unprofitable.

Or 2 seconds after the release of Sim City 6.

Re:Too little, too late

[Seumas]

I don't want a free game. I just want my money back. I've had no problems connecting and playing -- the game is just shit. This isn't SimCity. This is . . . a sort of high-gloss facebook game. Giving me a free game (that I probably already own) does nothing for me. Just give me my money back and you MIGHT have a chance of me returning to Origin as a customer. Maybe (and I buy a LOT of stuff).

Re:Too little, too late

[DR.F33LG00D]

Lol, it's hilarious watching these companies spend billions trying to fight piracy. The pirates always get an easier version to install and play than the people who pay, and sometimes, we even get the release ahead of time. There is NO WAY to secure some code that is running LOCALLY on my computer. I mean, wtf do they think they can do...put a dll or exe that has a check to verify you are logged in the EA servers when playing single player and make it impossible to crack? Hackers will isolate that code, remove it, and/or put stub API calls to always return true for where it is doing the API call to their servers, and the whole "security by online verification" goes out the window. These kinds of patches are happening all the time with games today, with cracked versions being released ahead of time or at most within a day or 2 after the release. Guess who has to deal with the issues where the servers are down? Paying customers... Theoretically, if they ran everyone's installations on their servers and it was streamed to the customers local machines, I am sure hackers would still find a way to aggregate all the content and make a distro. Or, they would just hack the servers and get the source code. This is why content providers would embrace a service like On-Live as a means of distribution for their titles. It streams the actual rendered frames to the user instead of giving them access to the binaries that run the game. Too bad that us 'old-fasioned' gamers (god, I'm old...how did this happen) will never be happy with the input lag and other issues with a service like this. I tried beta testing on-live and literally LOLed at the irony of the fact that it errored out due to my video card not supporting shader model 3.0. I heard the beta testing they did was a complete failure, as expected, because no one can handle that kind of bandwidth yet. EA, Blizzard, etc. we've seen their servers fall to their knees during releases of major products. And On-Live somehow thinks they are going to be able to stream all this content to end users for all games without their servers falling to their knees? Yea right, not in the next 10 years. Yes, getting an ISO with a CRACK folder that I have to drag and drop over to the installation directory is such a trivial task that I find it easier than paying for a game from a local store, Amazon, or any other means of distribution available. With torrent speeds that max out my connection, from the right super secret sites, I can get games faster than downloading it from any content provider and have it running within 20 minutes from the point of clicking download. Steam is amazing, though. That's one service that I feel was done right. I use Steam for purchasing games that I want to play online with other people. So for now, torrents for single player games and steam for online games seems like the way to go.

Re:Too little, too late

[Seumas]

Most services like Steam and Origin will shut down your account (and, therefore, all the games you "own" within it) if you do a credit card chargeback (as is your right as a customer of the credit card company).

Re:Too little, too late

[Seumas]

Not any more. Now days, most companies have betas that you have to pay $10-30 to participate in or buy another game to participate in. Or pre-order the game to participate in.

Of course, I don't know why anyone would want to participate in a beta. That just sounds like doing work for your recreational time.

Re:Too little, too late

[JMJimmy]

They could give me their entire catalog for free and I still would never buy another one of their future titles.

Their entire catalogue consists of 51 titles currently, the majority of which either require online DRM or have already had their servers shut down. Just what people pissed off about online DRM want.

Re: Too little, too late

[jxander]

Can't speak for Origin (as I don't use it) but at least Steam provides a lot of benefits to outweigh the DRM inherent. I will never misplace or damage a game disk, I don't have to put the CD in to play a game (or swap everytime I change games) I can effortlessly install any or all of my steam games on a new computer, and of course Steam Sales! Plus Steam also provides their own in-game chat, achivement trackers, and a ton of other little things. This. This is how you DRM. Steam's DRM is fairly unobtrusive. Just a quick check-in at start, and away you go ... and it provides plenty of benefits. EA, on the other hand, has demonstrated exactly how NOTto DRM.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Or they realize they won't have the problems ironed out until then.

Re:Too little, too late

[Opportunist]

No, they should have abandoned the DRM. That's the whole point.

Even IF this system had worked out I would not have bought it. I do not like the idea that I only get to play while hanging on their leading-string.

Re:Too little, too late

[Opportunist]

Actually, it's the one form of copy protection that will not only not work but actually drive customers away.

Let's be frank here, what is happening now?

1. People buy game.
2. People try to play and fail.
3. People search for solutions.
4. People stumble upon someone telling them that the game has been cracked and that the cracked version works.
5. People download cracked version.
6. People play game.

For other games, they'll just omit the (for them pointless) steps 1-4.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

I see it more like EA is saying: "You think our shit is shit? Here, have more of our shit!".

Considering that I know for a fact, that EA is a "The beatings will continue, until morale improves." company, I'm not surprised at all.

Re:Too little, too late

[Opportunist]

How dare they expect a product to work when all they did for it is to fork money over? The cheek!

Re:Too little, too late

[AxemRed]

SimCity had a closed but free beta. I participated in it. There were no requirements that you preorder the game or purchase anything else.

Re:Too little, too late

[Yomers]

They could run part of the code needed for singe player game on their servers, then there will be no cracks.

Re: Too little, too late

[tmosley]

Until they go bankrupt, then all your games and little "achievements" are thrown in the garbage can and you have to buy them all again.

The trend for the last few years has been to make closed garbage. I won't buy even one of these games unless I OWN it when I do so. If it requires an internet connection, I don't buy it. Period. Sadly, for now, that means I am mostly stuck with the PS2 and Wii. Oh well.

Re:Too little, too late

[Darinbob]

Giving a free game of their own is pointless. It costs them no money whatsoever to do this. Digital downloads cost nothing to them. They are doing this because it will hurt them financially to actually give refunds (which they refuse to do). Maybe they don't realize that they've actually lost customers who don't want any of their other junk.

Re: Too little, too late

[yotto]

You forgot the most important part (to me). Games on Steam are CHEAP if you are patient enough to not buy them the second they become available. I'm pretty sure every game that's been on Steam for more than a month or two has been involved in one sale or another. I frequently pick up games for 75-90% off retail price, after the game has been out 6 months or so. For those prices, I have no problem with not "actually" owning the game. I only play a couple of them at a time anyway and then they sit in my library for the rest of eternity.

Also, I have had 0 problems playing in offline mode. I don't know what problems others have, but they don't seem to surface for me. I played a LOT of Saints Row 3 in offline mode, and it worked like a charm.

Re:Too little, too late

[Darinbob]

This DRM is not about preventing piracy,. DRM in games has never been about piracy. Pirates aren't slowed down by this at all. The sole purpose of DRM in games is to prevent your legal rights to resell the games you purchased. Publishers are more afraid of game resales than piracy. Preventing resales will keep the prices of the game higher, and the publishers know this, from EA to Valve (there are no good guys in the DRM world).

Consider that if you were allowed to sell your crappy copy of SimCity 5 that the market would be flooded with cheap copies by now from the disgruntled customers, from $5-10. From eBay to bargain bins to just giving the game to unsuspecting friends. Consider that after all this screw up the game is still selling for FULL PRICE! $59.99! Note also that the physical copy is also $59.99, you get not even one single cent of discount for buying the digital copy, savings are not passed on to you.

The most amazing thing is that the same customers being screwed by DRM are also fans of it and will promote it. Just like you are implying that publishers have to do this, if you repeat this lie long enough customers will believe it.

Re: Too little, too late

[Darinbob]

Again, customers ironically defending the same publishers that are screwing them and stealing away their rights! "It's ok if he beats me, deep down he really loves me."

How do you explain that if you buy a physical copy of a Steam game is still comes with DRM and you can not give that physical copy away? The only thing the physical copy does is help you download it faster and to have something to pick up at the store.

If Valve is so full of saints then how come they refuse to let you resell or gift their games, denying you the rights you have under law?

There is no such thing as good and benevolent DRM!

What is happening here is that you are so infatuated with your digital download convenience that you will excuse and forgive all their sins. You are the reason DRM is succeeding.

Re:Too little, too late

[Darinbob]

People have known EA was full of sleaze for decades now. This should come as no surprise to anyone. I sort of feel sorry for Maxis for getting involved here and tarnishing their own game. But they made their own problem when they partnered with known scumbags.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

I ended up having to use the UK Data Protection Act to get hold of my account details, and sure enough my DOB was correct. The data also included "customer offered 15% discount" - which was news to me.

I wish we had a law like that in the US...would settle a lot of battles with getting stuff off my credit report (innacuracies which costs me an estimated $12k per year in additional interest rates, origination fees, insurance costs, etc.)

Re: Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason steam is tolerated and people defend it is due to one simple fact. That fact is that years ago we the PC gamer were forced out of the used game market by cooperation's like Microsoft, they claimed that software was one time purchase and it soon found its way into all aspects of the pc software distribution network. Now companies like EA are trying to do this with consoles. The fact that steam has tried to play nice with its customers (valve im still waiting on portal 3 here) is why people put up with drm on steam titles. Also steam is up front about whether a game is online ALWAYS or not. That is why we like steam and that is one reason origin fails.

Re:Too little, too late

[Rogerborg]

Say, after giving them £40 for Battlefield 3, did you then give them another £10 to file a Subject Access Request?

They must be weeping into their giant pile of money.

Re:Too little, too late

[Rogerborg]

Well, you also bought Sim City 5 up front, so they probably reckon you're dumb enough to keep coming back for more beatings. You're really not negotiating from a position of strength here.

Re: Too little, too late

[Rogerborg]

And yet for all your zeal in explaining why we should be angry and miserable, Steam users are generally very happy with the experience and keep voluntarily coming back for more.

These rights that you think you have are a relic. If you want to buy something for resale, I suggest a buggy whip.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

well, this new form of DRM in simcity is more like "D"iminished "R"evenue "M"anagement (for EA).. put out a broken, sucky game with one-time use serial and online requirement and people will choose to not buy it; or if they do, they'll complain *loudly*, they will return it, they will reverse credit card charges... all affecting EA's bottom line, and not to shareholders' benefit.

Re:Too little, too late

[Dogtanian]

Note also that the physical copy is also $59.99, you get not even one single cent of discount for buying the digital copy

The physical copy is just as digital as the downloadable one. Please (along with everyone else that does this) stop using "digital" as a synonym for "online" or "download".

Re:Too little, too late

[Rogerborg]

we want to allow you to download any of our outdated examples of complete DRM-ridden shit from our online catalog

Nothing in this non-binding non-guarantee commits to offering customers a choice at all, whether it's from the whole catalog or the dog eared and about-to-be-shitcanned section of it.

If you're inferring otherwise, well... it's EA. This is from the same... person... who claimed that the always-on aspect is all about gameplay, rather than being driven by EA's unslakable urge to kill off re-sales and older games. You can tell that she's lying because her fingers are moving.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Are there working offline cracks to this game? Does anyone know? It sounds like this game really deserves one, just out of principle! About code on a server being needed to run single-player mode, I assume in that case, the crack would run a local server with that code, and fool the program into thinking that it's connected to a remote server.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

You jest, but this behavior has become all too common with vaious facets of technology. Be it hardware or software, it seems like QA has become the extinct department in lieu of the bottom line, on a deadline. Which, seemingly has the opposite effect, since the bad press from a botched release, like this one, will forever damage a companies reputation.

I just don't understand how an entrenched multi-Million dollar company, an entertainment game company mind you, can fuck up this bad. From a potential customer perspective, they look like the worst possible investment imaginable.

Re:Too little, too late

[Cederic]

How long does it take you to read a letter, find out the authorised approach to respond to it, check 48 different databases, extract the relevant data, validate it, cleanse it of any data that might identify other individuals, collate it, and send a response to the individual making the SAR?

If it took you more than 20 minutes then even paying someone minimum wage to do all that (which is very unlikely, it'll be a little more than that) your company just made a loss on responding to the SAR.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

This DRM is not about preventing piracy,. DRM in games has never been about piracy. Pirates aren't slowed down by this at all. The sole purpose of DRM in games is to prevent your legal rights to resell the games you purchased. Publishers are more afraid of game resales than piracy. Preventing resales will keep the prices of the game higher, and the publishers know this, from EA to Valve (there are no good guys in the DRM world).

Consider that if you were allowed to sell your crappy copy of SimCity 5 that the market would be flooded with cheap copies by now from the disgruntled customers, from $5-10. From eBay to bargain bins to just giving the game to unsuspecting friends. Consider that after all this screw up the game is still selling for FULL PRICE! $59.99! Note also that the physical copy is also $59.99, you get not even one single cent of discount for buying the digital copy, savings are not passed on to you.

The most amazing thing is that the same customers being screwed by DRM are also fans of it and will promote it. Just like you are implying that publishers have to do this, if you repeat this lie long enough customers will believe it.

Nobody trades PC games, there never was a used PC game market worth mentioning. PC game rentals never took off, and console rentals were flying out the doors before and after the short time PC game rentals were available at brick and mortar rental chains.

Your theory only makes sense if you completely ignore the long history of game rentals. You're not losing anything the PC world ever really had.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah well, Blizzard gets it right on release days for their patches, why can't EA? And they've got 10x more customers logging in than EA does on any given day. Only thing i've seen is some minor lag, and some grumbling, but never completely unable to log on or getting kicked out of a game.

Re:Too little, too late

[Borg453b]

One EA employee to another: "Our refund approach is win-win. We come out as good guys AND a considerable amount of consumers will pick an older titel; say [rehash]2012 or better yet [rehash]2010.

You and I both know the server support scope for those titles. Get 'em hooked on additional product series with expiring server support; and they'll have invest, to keep playing.

Money in the bank, my friend.. money - in - the - bank."

Re:Too little, too late

[ultranova]

The sole purpose of DRM in games is to prevent your legal rights to resell the games you purchased.

Now now, I'm sure being able to force obsolescence also had a part in this.

Consider that after all this screw up the game is still selling for FULL PRICE!

Is it selling? The people who haven't bought it yet probably aren't going to, considering the reputation it has already got.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm disappointed in more ways than one. 1) Overloaded servers. Servers that go down every 5-10 minutes while playing. after a while it gets extremely old. 2) EXTREMELY poor customer service. I (living in the US) purchased the physical disc copy o the game, as I like to have some quick restore point if something goes wrong, or I lose my data. March 5th came and went, and no game. Same with March 6, and 7. Finally, on the 8th (three full days after I was supposed to get it, it arrived. Why? They use some second-rate hybrid delivery service, UPS Mail Innovations, which takes much longer than normal to ship. in my case, it took almost a full week. When I called customer service about it, they were very rude towatd me, and told me the game would arrive on time (sorry, but in my book, three days late does not equate to "on time". They wouldn't even give me anything to appease the fact that I was unhappy and bordering on Irate with their piss-poor service. 3) The fact that after you've worked your butt off building up a city, and you get some error code telling you that your city isn't processing correctly, and you only have 2 options, to abandon, or rollback (and to my knowledge the rollback to a previous state option doesn't work, as I have yet to get back into the my city to play it. EA/Maxis, you screwed up big time. That's 3 strikes, you're out!

Re:Too little, too late

[Goaway]

Works pretty well for World of Warcraft.

Re:Too little, too late

[History's Coming To]

No, I sent them a pro forma letter requesting the information and asking them to send it, or to get back to me if there was an associated fee. I had to chase them a month later, but I got it, without any fee.

Re:Too little, too late

[ElectricTurtle]

Anything that can be transmitted can be captured and emulated.

Re:Too little, too late

[warpuck]

I won't play even if I got all the updates for free. I revise and upgrade my gamer every 3-6 months. If the software does not recognize that this the same user, and basically the same computer, then a purchase of the the next ver is not going happen. Yes, I do know about Steam.

Re:Too little, too late

[DreadPiratePizz]

Show me where a complete, working crack of Diablo 3 is. Oh wait there isn't one since so much of the code runs server side. What's out there is a buggy half playable mess with tons of missing content. When you run tons of code and serve content server side, you can't just crack it and call it a day. It's delusional to think pirates will win if the industry goes with these methods.

Re:Too little, too late

[Gen_Music]

Not really, it just means that there is a need for clean room reverse engineering. Hackers have done a lot more to get a piece of software functional without DRM. Hell look at Syncrosoft Key Emulation, they practically built an emulator to emulate an external processor that ran crypto code inside a USB key. That takes a LOT of expertise.

Re:Too little, too late

[Gen_Music]

What you're saying is akin to saying 'If you emulate Facebook it won't be Facebook cos all my friends won't be there.'

There are complete working cracks of Diablo and the missing content is probably the online social stuff/multiplayer, which is the nature of doing without the server it's supposed to be tethered to.

Re:Too little, too late

[Gen_Music]

That's just not true.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget 3.5. People demand refund

Re: Too little, too late

[Samizdata]

And this is why I have repurchased several games on Steam - I am really good at misplacing "game" discs and CD keys.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, the funny thing about Ubisoft's city simulator, Anno 2070: it has a single-player fallback, so you're not totally dependent on their servers. Hm, if only someone at EA/Maxis could have thought of such a clever and innovative solution...

Re:Too little, too late

[Keybounce]

Yeah well, Blizzard gets it right on release days ...

Clearly, you never tried playing World of Warcraft on release?

This was a game that was supposed to redefine how online games would work. With anti-ganking systems in place -- even documented as such.

And, they even gave a 30 day refund if you didn't like it -- so you could try it, risk free. Right?

No.

The first week was a complete disaster. They realized this. They gave everyone a week's extension.

At the end of that time? When I realized that several features not only were not implemented, would not be implemented -- the whole point of a PVP server where PvP would be made fair by game rules to prevent ganking, except that they decided it was impossible? Etc?

How about the complete lack of play testing and balance on some of the classes? The bugs? The lack of features in various areas of the Horde's side (I later learned that the Allience's side was much better developed, fleshed out, and much closer to being "finished").

I asked for my money back. I wanted my refund.

"Sorry, your 30 day refund period expired 7 days ago. We cannot give you a refund. If you are not happy, we'll try to appease you with a 10% discount on your next month's subscription."

I no longer buy anything from Blizzard. They went from "Nothing wrong" (I may not have liked the Diablo games, but those that did said they were excellent) to "So completely messed up I never want to deal with them again".

Refuse to refund me, per their promise? I now bad-mouth them every chance I get.

I strongly recommend that everyone bad-mouth EA every chance you get. Make sure that these companies know that unhappy customers have very long memories and very big mouths

Re: Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

good thing valve has a cash hoard of something like 70 years of OPEX and is run by people who seem like they would genuinely run their firm into the ground to support their customers.

Re: Too little, too late

[tmosley]

Sure, that will never change. None of the principles will ever die unexpectedly, and their heirs would NEVER sell out their inheritance for cashola. Also, things are always exactly what they seem, ESPECIALLY to uninformed outsiders who comment anonymously on the internet.

Re:Too little, too late

[Anonymous Coward]

[paragraphs needed]

Re:Too little, too late

[Darinbob]

Well, if it did sell that is... If this was ten years ago and the gaem required a CD/DVD, most stores out there by now would have started discounting the boxes by now.

They obviously thought...

[Zemran]

... that with all that really bad DRM shai'te no one would actually buy it... so they were not prepared for actual sales.

Re:They obviously thought...

[Anonymous Coward]

We obviously thought that with all that really bad DRM shai'te no one would actually buy it... so we were not prepared for actual sales.

FTFY.

Welcome to the netherworld of no longer being part of a lucrative market.

Re:They obviously thought...

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be a lot of fun at parties.

Vote with your wallet

[Beavertank]

There's an easy fix to this: Never, ever, ever buy a game that has always on DRM.

Eventually the game manufacturers will learn.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

EA even has an 'easy' fix. Prob a few days work. Give the end user the server code. Then let the users point at local servers... They will *never* do it though.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this apply to MMOs?

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

There's an easy fix to this: Never, ever, ever buy a game that has always on DRM.

Eventually the game manufacturers will learn.

We HAVE voted with our wallets. And we're getting clearly outvoted, else publishers and developers wouldn't keep doing it.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

There's an easy fix to this: Never, ever, ever buy a game that has always on DRM.

That approach requires people to be capable of considering the future and what's in their own best interest. Thus, it will never work.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[adunstan]

Doubt it, they will just blame piracy and shove even more DRM on it, they may eventually fail but more companies using DRM like this will come, how are they supposed to know why you didn't buy it if you don't tell them? I believe the best solution is to spread as much word of bad press like this as we can, keep showing these companies that we don't want always online for games we may want to play single player in, and keep giving these games bad reviews stating why you didn't like the always online, and talk about the issue for as long as possible so they never forget. Stop letting these companies convince themselves that the reason things go wrong is because of piracy; don't vote with your wallet, vote with your voice - spread your opinion everywhere, sign petitions such as the one here . If you want to see change, then do something about it.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Mycroft_VIII]

Sadly it will take a lot of people not buying or pirating several games that would otherwise be popular for them to get it, they'll blame piracy or that the game wasn't very good before they believe that the drm they waste money on is the problem (kickbacks from the companies that sell this snake oil wouldn't be unbelievable to me).

Mycroft

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Beavertank]

The issue is sort of moot for MMOs. Because of the game's basic nature it's unplayable without an internet connection, whether or not there's a persistent connection to a DRM server as well as the game server doesn't really matter at that point (assuming the DRM servers, separate or not, don't have uptime problems).

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anne_Nonymous]

Plus, give it a nice review.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

The issue is sort of moot for MMOs. Because of the game's basic nature it's unplayable without an internet connection, whether or not there's a persistent connection to a DRM server as well as the game server doesn't really matter at that point (assuming the DRM servers, separate or not, don't have uptime problems).

Then it's moot here as well. Just because people WANT it to be single player doesn't change the fact it was designed to be multiplayer. EA should be taking shit for deceptive marketing, and for the decision to not make a single player option. But people keep acting as if it's a single player game with an always-on requirement and that simply is not the case.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[meerling]

"Vote with your wallet" does NOT work unless you can get a massive portion of the entire market to participate. (Or more accurately, refuse to participate.)
All the retailer sees is a slight dip in sales for campaigns that start after something has been on the market for a while. If it's a new product, sales just aren't as high as they could be, but the retailers have no idea what it could have been.
Not buying the product is INVISIBLE TO THE RETAILER. Unless, as I stated earlier, you can virtually wipe out all sales, something that is virtually impossible. (Ebola plague juice being an exception.)

Here's the best way to get it through their thick adamantium plated marketing spin enhanced skulls. COMMUNICATE!
Email, in large enough quantities, can get their attention. However, some companies kind of ignore or filter that stuff, and besides, they are wary of scriptbots spamming them.
Dead Tree Format Snail Mail may be old fashioned, but companies will pay a LOT more attention to it. I've seen email campaigns that got thousands of responses that got ignored, when a letter writing campaign of 60-80 letters got an immediate and positive response for the same issue.

Here's another hint. Don't attack, insult, or threaten them. That's another fast way to get you attempt neutralized, and maybe even get some cops knocking on your door. That doesn't mean you can't tell them what you don't like, how you feel about it, and what you think is a better idea, just be polite and civil about it.
You see, the person reading the mail, usually isn't the person in charge. Though they may forward your mail up the chain of command. Attacking that person is NOT going to help you, in fact, that kind of stuff usually makes them roundfile your letter. (Yes, that means throw it away, or if that's illegal, throw it into the dusty box in the backroom that nobody ever looks in.)
You being an impolite thug with lots of profanity and the like will get a similar response to attacking people.
And I wish I didn't happen to mention it, but don't make threats. Either physical or legal. Physical threats will get you in a permanent troublemaker file where you will be ignored by everyone except the police. And yes, they do occasionally respond to these kinds of threats with investigations and arrests.
As to legal threats, they are a different problem. You may get ignored, depending on the details, but most likely you will get sent to the legal department that will decide how valid your threats are, and proceed from there. As to proceeding from there, nothing will ever happen until the legal paperwork for a court date or whatever shows up. You can't bluff a lawyer with legal threats, you actually have to follow through, and of course, taking legal action against a company is not what writing to them is for. Legal threats will get even less attention from a company than physical threats, and neither one will advance your cause.

One final note for everyone. A well written letter is good, but a thousand identical letters isn't a thousand times better. Have a skilled writer make a template or example for people to use, but everyone should personalize it to make each letter unique, but clear and to the point. After all, the same exact letter over and over will just be treated as spam.

That's about all I can say, other than I'm as sick of hearing people say vote with your wallet, because it just doesn't work.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Beavertank]

If the game mode is single player there's no reason to expect to need an internet connection. If EA wants the game to be partially dependent on a remote server even for single player then it's NOT "single player" and calling it that is extremely deceptive.

Single player = local play. If a company wants to redesign that then they need a new name for it so it's clear.

MMOs do not have single player modes, so there's no expectation of local play.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[jd2112]

There's an easy fix to this: Never, ever, ever buy a game that has always on DRM.

Eventually the game manufacturers will learn.

We HAVE voted with our wallets. And we're getting clearly outvoted, else publishers and developers wouldn't keep doing it.

In the eyes of an EA exec (Or MPAA/RIAA, etc) Any and all lost sales are due to piracy.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Opportunist]

If a game is supposedly one that I play alone, it is a single player game. And in a single player game I guess I should be allowed to expect that I don't need someone else telling me I may play it.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Opportunist]

To EA, that means you didn't vote with your wallet but clearly that you copied it and that their DRM is not invasive enough.

I have no idea what else they could come up with, though. Maybe next you'll need a webcam and face recognition software making sure that it's really YOU who play.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

honestly? I have started to wonder, over the years, how honest dirt bags like EA and Ubi really are about their sales.
After all, who holds them to account for any lies they tell? the police? they aren't obligated to tell the truth AT ALL.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

Sadly it will take a lot of people not buying or pirating several games that would otherwise be popular for them to get it, they'll blame piracy[...]

So if we pirate their games, they'll blame piracy? THOSE BASTARDS. BURN THEM ALL!

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Sabriel]

Voting with your wallet by not buying is like voting at the polls by not picking any of the candidates.

If you want to vote with your wallet (as opposed to simply saving the money), you have to buy a competitor's game.

Or fund one. As far as alternatives to SimCity go, perhaps Civitas on Kickstarter? Their goal is to have all the SimCity features: big cities, terraforming, subways, curved roads, real singleplayer, disasters, save/reload, etc, with none of that always on DRM. Oh, AND LINUX SUPPORT (check the Updates page).

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Demonantis]

I vote with my wallet so I don't have to deal with a crap game. There is enough content out there you don't notice the difference really. You only get screwed on the games that the first one in the series was awesome (bioware :( ). You shouldn't care about what other people do.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[tompaulco]

Then it's moot here as well. Just because people WANT it to be single player doesn't change the fact it was designed to be multiplayer. EA should be taking shit for deceptive marketing, and for the decision to not make a single player option. But people keep acting as if it's a single player game with an always-on requirement and that simply is not the case.
Simcity is inherently a single player game. And it is still a single player game, But now your single player game depends on other single player games happening on the same server. So far I have seen zero people in favor of this strategy and hundreds who don't like it. This is like making solitaire dependent on other solitaire games going on nearby. Who wants that? If you wanted a game that involved other people, you would play hearts or spades or something,

Re:Vote with your wallet

[tompaulco]

Sadly it will take a lot of people not buying or pirating several games that would otherwise be popular for them to get it,
Pirating doesn't help. pirating says "I want to play this game but I don't want to pay for it." The message we need to send is "I don't want to play your game".

Re:Vote with your wallet

[tompaulco]

Plus, give it a nice review.

Ouch. That's gotta send some kind of message.

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

"Vote with your wallet" does NOT work unless...
Here's the best way to get it through their thick adamantium plated marketing spin enhanced skulls. COMMUNICATE!...
  Don't attack, insult, or threaten them.

Right. And also whine, whine, whine. I think Jim Sterling said it best:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6187-Why-Boycotts-Fail-Where-Whining-Tantrums-Win

Re:Vote with your wallet

[Mycroft_VIII]

Sorry left out a comma. should have said neither buying nor pirating or some such, made it clear lack of both was what i meant.

Mycroft

We are sorry our products are so shitty.

[pclminion]

In order to make you feel better, please choose one of our other shitty products. Two shitty games are better than one!

Re:We are sorry our products are so shitty.

[Anonymous Coward]

You, sir, are an optimist.

The actual wording is pretty smarmy. Using the word portfolio leads one to believe one will be able to select any title from their portfolio. But read it carefully and you'll see not only does it not say that, it doesn't say you will have ANY choice as to which game.

Re:We are sorry our products are so shitty.

[jd2112]

In order to make you feel better, please choose one of our other shitty products. Two shitty games are better than one!

And good luck getting to the activation server.

Re:We are sorry our products are so shitty.

[Anonymous Coward]

They also don't mention that after enjoying the privilege of a free download of a game you didn't want you then need to pay an activation fee to actually play the game.

Back in the real world, even EA wouldn't be that evil. Or would they????

Re:We are sorry our products are so shitty.

[sharkey]

Sounds like someone needs some Jameson to re-enter the Matrix.

Free Single Player?

[grim4593]

A free single-player version of the new SimCity game would be nice.

Re:Free Single Player?

[ZombieBraintrust]

There are older versions of Sim City that are single player. Maybe you should play one of those games. Making a new game means changing things. I suppose they could of just changed released Sim City 2000 with hi res textures. But I think that would of been a failure as well. Adding multiplayer is a reasonable change. Selling more copies of the game than you have servers for is stupid.

Re:Free Single Player?

[BonThomme]

"adding multiplayer" implies nothing was subtracted

Re:Free Single Player?

[spire3661]

Its only akin to an MMO because the devs forced it, jsut like Diablo III. What game designer in his right mind thought putting a hardcore mode in a game where a moment of lag can wipe out months of work?? Forcing online-only causes devs to give up some fundamental gameplay for monetization. THATS WHY WE GET UPSET.

Re:Free Single Player?

[MartinSchou]

Multiplayer Sim City does sound interesting, I agree, but they've gone about doing it in entirely the wrong way.

A much smarter way would have been to implement save-games in a Git-like fashion, where you can pick and choose which people to play with.

This obviously won't work for a real time game, but for games like Sim City and the like, it'd work just fine. Hell, a Civilization style game could work fine as well.

Re:Free Single Player?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its only akin to an MMO because the devs forced it, jsut like Diablo III.

NO, you just don't get it. World of Warcraft could have had a single player mode, too. Any online game could have had a single player mode. The developers have to make a design decision early on as to whether they make it purely online, purely offline, or both options available.

No matter what you think, there is NO way to prevent cheating and hacking if you allow someone to do ANYTHING offline and then cross that over to the online mode. The client software has to essentially be a "terminal" which sends requests to the game server, and displays what the server sends back. ALL the game rules MUST be processed on that server- if you ever allow the client to TELL the server what it did, that WILL be exploited. End Of Story.

If you are going to be upset, be upset that EA chose to not include a single player mode. Be pissed that they did a very careful job avoiding the mention of no single-player mode. Be pissed that they did a shit job launching the game. But don't bitch about them requiring the multiplayer game to require an always on connection. That's how it ought to be, and any game which allows clients to run while not connected are ripe for exploiting.

Re:Free Single Player?

[Anonymous Coward]

I own Simcity Classic, 2000, 3000, 3000 for Linux by Loki Software, 4 Deluxe Edition, and the Rush Hour expansion. I won't be owning this game until it can be played offline. All I wanted was Simcity 4 with multicore and GPU simulation acceleration. Imagine how much math can be done in parallel using OpenCL or CUDA.

Maybe this kickstarter will be a hit and EA will wake up. They should start by reading the Valve employee handbook and firing the entire management team unless they take a development role.

Re:Free Single Player?

[Your.Master]

The problem is that Simcity seems almost trivial to make single-player. There's an almost-wholly-single-player mode that just needs some random variables for the global economy and you're done. When you're online you can even download real trendlines.

Sure, taking the city out of online and back in is prone to cheating. So don't let them do that.

Re:Free Single Player?

[tompaulco]

It's not a single-player game, get over it. That's like asking for a single-player version of World of Warcraft.

Simcity is and has always been a single player game. Simcity 5 is a single player game. It just has input from other cities, which is completely superfluous to the game.

If you don't like that, don't buy it.

Done and done.

The better product

[Groo Wanderer]

And they keep bitching at me when I write up that piracy has moved past "free" and now is about a demonstrably better product. Free is almost lost in the noise now. The state of modern consumer fleecing has gotten painful to watch.

Download a free game???

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't that... piracy?!

Re:Download a free game???

[sgt scrub]

Nah. Uploading a game for free is piracy.

Even better

[lesincompetent]

Even without the always-on DRM this game would still suck! Too bad this fact has been overshadowed by the DRM débâcle!

yeah?

[roc97007]

> They are unrepentant about the always-online requirement though.

And I am equally unrepentant about not buying any more of their stuff.

EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[SternisheFan]

POSTED BY Lucy Bradshaw ON Mar 8, 2013 A SimCity UpdateAnd Something For Your Trouble

Here’s a quick update on the problems we were experiencing with SimCity – and a little something extra for people who bought the game.

The server issues which began at launch have improved significantly as we added more capacity. But some people are still experiencing response and stability problems that we’re working fast to address.

So what went wrong? The short answer is: a lot more people logged on than we expected. More people played and played in ways we never saw in the beta.

OK, we agree, that was dumb, but we are committed to fixing it. In the last 48 hours we increased server capacity by 120 percent. It’s working – the number of people who have gotten in and built cities has improved dramatically. The number of disrupted experiences has dropped by roughly 80 percent.

So we’re close to fixed, but not quite there. I’m hoping to post another update this weekend to let everyone know that the launch issues are behind us.

Something Special for Your Trouble (see linked page at bottom of post)

The good news is that SimCity is a solid hit in all major markets. The consensus among critics and players is that this is fundamentally a great game. But this SimCity is made to be played online, and if you can’t get a stable connection, you’re NOT having a good experience. So we’re not going to rest until we’ve fixed the remaining server issues.

And to get us back in your good graces, we’re going to offer you a free PC download game from the EA portfolio. On March 18, SimCity players who have activated their game will receive an email telling them how to redeem their free game.

I know that’s a little contrived – kind of like buying a present for a friend after you did something crummy. But we feel bad about what happened. We’re hoping you won’t stay mad and that we’ll be friends again when SimCity is running at 100 percent.

SimCity is a GREAT game and the people who made it are incredibly proud. Hang in there – we’ll be providing more updates throughout the weekend.

http://www.ea.com/news/a-simcity-update-and-something-for-your-trouble

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Beavertank]

It's such a great game that it has a one star rating on Amazon. Only the best of the best manage that!

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Huntr]

That response is as big a pile of horseshit as the game. Of course, that's expected marketing spin, but at some point the bald truth saves more face than grasping at straws (I wish...).

The good news is that SimCity is a solid hit in all major markets.

Gamers don't care about that. The good news would be your mess is un-f'd.

Actually, I think this is a great example of why digital downloads (of anything) shouldn't cost as much as the same thing distributed on disk. Obviously the net worth of the digitally distributed version of these games is such that EA can pass out a bunch of them in the name of good will. Doing that is an economic decision and speaks to the lesser value of the digital good.

In conclusion, screw EA.

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Anonymous Coward]

"More people played and played in ways we never saw in the beta."

WHAT THE MERRY FUCK DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?!?! I'm sorry, I'm angry, are these not the people who market and press and supply the damned things to shops and download retailers? How dare they try and feed us this horse shit. If it is not a bare faced lie then something far far worse is wrong here.

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Anonymous Coward]

So what went wrong? The short answer is: a lot more people logged on than we expected. More people played and played in ways we never saw in the beta.

Beta tester here: Maybe if their beta lasted longer then 24 hours they would have seen this coming.

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Anonymous Coward]

That response is as big a pile of horseshit as the game.

No, it's not. Allow me to enlighten you on the part you obviously missed:

But this SimCity is made to be played online

This question was asked by many people prior to even going on sale- the answer was avoided by EA and people who claimed on the forums that it was going to be online-only had their posts deleted and accounts banned. EA should be taking the heat for Deceptive Marketing, not for making an online-only game... online only.

They should have made an offline mode. They knew it was a bad decision not to do so, which is why they avoided mentioning this in advance. They should be taking heat for that. But not for requiring an online-only game to be... online only.

In conclusion, screw EA.

Yes, I agree. Fuck them. But not for requiring an online-only game to be... online only.

Get the point? Be pissed about the right thing people. This isn't a DRM issue, it's an issue of deceptive marketing and intentionally ignoring your player base.

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Atomic Fro]

No kidding. How could they possibly think the amount of people who played beta would have translated to the amount of people that would actually play the game? Oh, thats right, the PC gaming platform is dead. They only thought people who signed up for beta would play.
The share holders should replace every single executive at Electronic Arts who thought implementing Ubi's DRM scheme was a good idea.

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Opportunist]

I really cannot help but comment. I usually don't even bother reading through marketing drivel, but I just cannot resist in this case. Also, I'm usually not one to weigh someone's words, but in this case I will. Mostly because with press statements by big companies it can usually be said that these are very, very carefully worded and reread a few times before being pushed out the door.

POSTED BY Lucy Bradshaw ON Mar 8, 2013
A SimCity UpdateAnd Something For Your Trouble

Here’s a quick update on the problems we were experiencing with SimCity – and a little something extra for people who bought the game.

The server issues which began at launch have improved significantly as we added more capacity. But some people are still experiencing response and stability problems that we’re working fast to address.

So what went wrong? The short answer is: a lot more people logged on than we expected. More people played and played in ways we never saw in the beta.

No kidding? You saw more people play than were in the beta? Now, I may be working in the wrong field in IT, but isn't that the norm? I mean, that you have fewer beta testers than you later have customers? Or was it that your testers gave you so many "this sucks donkey balls, I certainly won't play this game even if YOU paid ME" reviews that it made you think it would be the other way around?

OK, we agree, that was dumb, but we are committed to fixing it. In the last 48 hours we increased server capacity by 120 percent. It’s working – the number of people who have gotten in and built cities has improved dramatically. The number of disrupted experiences has dropped by roughly 80 percent.

Oh joy. But what does that mean? I mean, if I got booted every minute and now it only happens every 5 minutes, it ain't that big an improvement, those "80 percent". A relative number isn't really a good indicator if you don't tell me the absolute behind it. But let's let it ride.

So we’re close to fixed, but not quite there. I’m hoping to post another update this weekend to let everyone know that the launch issues are behind us.

You are HOPING to post another update this weekend? Well, I'm HOPING so too, though in my experience fixing computer problems has little to do with hope and faith. Is that how you work at EA, hoping and guessing?

Something Special for Your Trouble (see linked page at bottom of post)

The good news is that SimCity is a solid hit in all major markets. The consensus among critics and players is that this is fundamentally a great game.

Gee, those Amazon reviews sure could have fooled me.

But this SimCity is made to be played online, and if you can’t get a stable connection, you’re NOT having a good experience.

You don't say. Really? Odd, nobody noticed that I guess.

So we’re not going to rest until we’ve fixed the remaining server issues.

You mean you won't let your employees rest 'til then. At least don't act like you're going to work weekends just 'cause customers ain't playing what they paid for.

And to get us back in your good graces, we’re going to offer you a free PC download game from the EA portfolio. On March 18, SimCity players who have activated their game will receive an email telling them how to redeem their free game.

Wrong wording, Lucy. You could say "To TRY to get back in your good graces". Whether you get back in our good graces is to be determined. Rather... I guess to do that you'd first of all have to admit that what you did was a kick to the nuts of your customers and give them their money back. But I guess that's out of the question, that could cost you money. It's easier to just hand out some trinkets to the natives and tell

Re:EA's Lucy Bradshaw's post

[Anonymous Coward]

nah, I think it was that the game only lasted 30 minutes or whatever the limit was... I was just barely getting started when it expired each time, I played it 3 times, but I would've played for about 16 hours or so straight if it was one single game... they should've let you keep your save game too

Never strikes twice?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bearing in mind that a huge part of this fiasco has been a massive underestimation of required server capacity it'd be hilarious if the same thing happens when this free-game process goes live.

"We're sorry, but due to heavy server load we are unable to process your free game download. Estimated queue time: 20 minutes."

Fuck em

[JohnRoss1968]

If I cant even play a single player game off-line I wont buy it. Fuck em I hope SimCity crashes and burns hard.
BTW I have purchased all of the other SimCitys as well as some of the side games, BUT I will NEVER buy SimCity again until they remove this allways on DRM crap.
PS. Did I mention FUCK EM.

Pet Hotel Tycoon!

[BenJeremy]

I expect, given EA's greed, that this will be the "free game" they give to every victim of their ineptitude. ...that or they'll give away free copies of Star Wars: The Old Republic

Re:Pet Hotel Tycoon!

[Anonymous Coward]

that or they'll give away free copies of Star Wars: The Old Republic

No shame there. That might very well be the best game in their portfolio :)

Re:Pet Hotel Tycoon!

[BenJeremy]

that or they'll give away free copies of Star Wars: The Old Republic

No shame there. That might very well be the best game in their portfolio :)

Well, take a look at how much they charge for that game, though. I'm not sure EA can afford to do that.... oh wait....

Would have liked to play it...

[Loki_666]

but I'm already boycotting any always connected games or any other product. I can live without, plenty of other good games available, plus my back catalog of awesome games that i always go back to, and thanks to visualization, i can always return to even the oldest ones.

After the Bioware debacle where they disabled their authentication servers (fortunately games still playable online) and Gamespy shutting down their old servers (without the publishers releasing patches to enable online matchups without gamespy - eg: Marvel: Ultimate Alliance), I'm totally against any form of always-on connection.

I'm not even willing to trust Steam now. I believe Gabe is a good man, and as long as he is at the helm things will be cool, but one day he will be gone, and when the first profit oriented CEO takes over, it will just turn into another EA or Ubisoft, and at that point, support for old games will suddenly disappear, and one by one, those games you paid for will no longer work. Or at least that is my guess... i'm not willing to risk it. I want the games i bought to be mine.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Loki_666]

LOL... And, just to reinforce my belief, my internet just dropped 2 seconds after making this post. If I was playing an always online game at that point, my game would have either stopped/lagged badly/or maybe just crashed.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[_xeno_]

I'm not even willing to trust Steam now.

But, but, Steam has an offline mode! That you must be online to enable. So if you lose your Internet connection, you lose the ability to play all your Steam games until it's back up again and you can "go offline." (As Steam itself won't even start if you don't have an Internet connection and aren't already in offline mode.)

So now I count Steam as being an "always connected" form of DRM. Strictly speaking, it isn't, in the sense that if you're already playing a game, you won't be kicked out. But if you try and start a game without being online or having the foresight to know that your Internet connection is going to die and going offline before that happens, you'll be locked out of your entire library.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[jjjhs]

I usually don't have any problems with offline mode, my cellphone hotspot is my primary/only available internet connection and is very unreliable, getting dropped from the cell network quite often.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I would care a lot more about this except for a few things.
First, Steam DRM is really easy to strip. If Valve goes to the darkside I will get rid of the DRM on my games without a hair of guilt.
Second, I have a really spotty internet connection and have been using steam for over 7 years. In that time I have had trouble running my games about three times, all in the first few years. I know some people do still have problems, but the low numbers of problems is a testament to Valve's commitment to makes sure it stays a value adding form of DRM rather than value subtracting.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[X0563511]

Erm, if I'm disconnected when I launch it, I get asked if I want to start it in offline mode.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Anonymous Coward]

I gave up on steam once they introduced Mandatory Binding Arbitration. I had a choice of either continuing to play the games I "own" and accepting it, or not accepting it and all those games going bye-bye.

So I chose option #3: To accept it and to never, ever, not even for $0.99, buy another game from Steam ever again. That's a few hundred a year lost to those fools.

I suggest you all do the same. Fuck MBA and fuck Steam.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Erm, if I'm disconnected when I launch it, I get asked if I want to start it in offline mode.

This sometimes works. Other times and on other systems it is completely impossible to enter offline mode, even while actively connected. It's a very widespread problem - read the Steam forums or just try to go offline once a week for a year and count how many of those attempts fail. I think that number will be 5 to 10.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's game dependent. I don't know why people modded up this huge overgeneralization. Slashdot loves Gabe and all but come on, let's call a spade a spade. Steam is DRM.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Pirate_Pettit]

Well, yes and no. If 'offline mode' is activated at least once with the current installed catalog, then it can be activated again at a later date without a connection. The trouble is automatic updates - if the system has an update queued, or your list of games has changed since the last offline session, it won't activate without an active connection first. Lastly, and most importantly, you can keep steam configured as 'offline' for as long as you wish - so if you wanted to use it as purchase/update service, you could just go online when you want to make changes, and stay offline the rest of the time. Basically the only time this system really screws you is during an unexpected connection outage - especially in proximity to a client update. Which, admittedly, is exactly when I want to play my video games, too.

I grant you it's convoluted. But as online activation schemes go, it's hardly onerous. I've only had one steam launch negatively impacted by download numbers, and that was ages ago, and it was a question of server download rates, not activation/verification/prove-you-bought-me bullshit. I'm happy EA pulled its new titles from steam - a launch like this would give valve a bad name.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[X0563511]

No, it's not. Would you call iTunes DRM? No. It uses it, but it is not the primary function.

Re:Would have liked to play it...

[Loki_666]

but the low numbers of problems is a testament to Valve's commitment to makes sure it stays a value adding form of DRM rather than value subtracting.

I'm sure their hearts are in the right place, but the only "value add" that comes from DRM is for the supplier, never for the purchaser. All DRM does is makes it harder for the legitimate purchaser to play/use/copy their own legally purchased copy.

Schadenfreud

[Anonymous Coward]

Haven't they suffered enough already?

This is why I don't buy games very often.

[ChangeOnInstall]

I have the income to buy them. I have the desire to play them. I have the computer hardware to play them. And I won't pirate them.

But I won't pay you $50 or $60 and be rewarded with the very kind of stress that I've purchased the game to temporarily escape from. You're not going to stop the pirates, but you are going to stop me.

Re:This is why I don't buy games very often.

[Anonymous Coward]

It is rare when I will shell out $60 for a game. A year later most games are half that, and wait long enough and you can get the game, plus all the DLC for even less.

As an added bonus, the game has, by that point, been patched multiple times, has copious stragety/cheats/whatever online, and has been reviewed by thousands who have played it through all the way multiple times.

Consolation: You get a game you don't want?

[HalAtWork]

What sense does it make to give SimCity players another game from EA that they probably don't want? My dad got this game and he's not interested in playing Dead Space or whatever else, he only wants to play SimCity. They should just fix the problems the game has in the first place and allow "offline single player mode" a.k.a. normal fucking single player mode like any other game has.

Re:Consolation: You get a game you don't want?

[whoop]

It's to give you something to do while you're unable to play Sim City. Genius!

Re:Consolation: You get a game you don't want?

[Anonymous Coward]

They should just fix the problems the game has in the first place and allow "offline single player mode" a.k.a. normal fucking single player mode like any other game has.

But they won't, because of people like you who buy it anyway, no matter how abusive the DRM and online requirements. Why should they not abuse you, when you've clearly shown that they can, and you will give them money anyway?

Re:Consolation: You get a game you don't want?

[Anonymous Coward]

EA says it will email SimCity owners March 18th on how to get their free game, that's 9 days from now. So they're actually giving you something else to "look forward to" while looking forward to getting to play SimCity..

Re:Consolation: You get a game you don't want?

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't buy that shit, someone else did (ol' dad), they got screwed, and now they're bringing it back to the store actually.

All in all

[lesincompetent]

Poor Maxis, i feel so bad for them.

Re:All in all

[jones_supa]

Yup. Behind the horrible crust of DRM and connectivity problems, there's a fine game inside.

Re:All in all

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor Maxis, i feel so bad for them.

It's sad how often this can reasonably be updated.

Re:All in all

[lesincompetent]

That's not exactly what i meant: the game has been both ruined by the DRM and by the dumbing down. What i meant is that both of these issues are EA's fault: the big, evil, greed, corporation with no intention of producing works of art. Just cash cows.

Re:All in all

[Opportunist]

The sad part is, there isn't. What I've seen so far is that the game was dumbed down enough that even SC2000 looks complicated in comparison.

Re:All in all

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's not EA's fault. They're making what people buy. It's your fault, personally, and the fault of millions of others that buy this DRMed dumbed down shit.

Stop buying it, and they'll stop making it. There are plenty of DRM-free games to buy. Put your money where your mouth is, or STFU. The fucked up state of modern gaming is your personal fault. Thank you very much for being one of the hundreds of millions willing to shovel money at dumbed down, locked down, always-connected games.

Why buy one when you can buy two for twice the...

[tutufan]

No, but you can have a second copy of the multi-player version. W00t!

What about a Simcity 4.5? or simcity 4 source code

[Joe_Dragon]

What about a Simcity 4.5? or simcity 4 source code?

Even if out looking at the DRM simcity 5 is to dumbed down and the city sizes are to small.

Now I used to play simcity 4 + NAM and other plugins But it needs the source code to fix stuff.

The simcity 5 beta made my move from maybe buy to not buy and buy a different game.

I'd like Sim City 5 please.

[Anonymous Coward]

With a side of fries and an apple fritter.

Re:The better product is city in motion 2

[Joe_Dragon]

Re:The better product is city in motion 2 or some of ideas on kicker starter.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1584821767/civitas-plan-develop-and-manage-the-city-of-your-d

http://www.train-fever.com/

Reality

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of the people posting angry rants on EA's facebook page are people who bought the game, will keep it, and will play it once the server issues are ironed out. And when EA produces an on-par sequel, they will buy that too.

There are some people who would enjoy this game, but won't buy it because of the DRM and server issues. However, what EA (and their ilk) have learned so far is: this population is small.

So long as the greater part of their target audience is willing to put up with this frustration and still buy the games, EA will keep frustrating them, apologizing, and laughing all the way to the bank.

As right as you are about voting with your wallet, the majority of EA's target audience have already outvoted you.

Re:Reality

[xstonedogx]

Which is to say EA hasn't learned at all. I'd love a new SimCity game, but I won't buy it in this state. So not only did they spend the money to make it unplayable, but they lost some numbers of sales. I am hard-pressed to believe the *real* losses from piracy (i.e. those who would buy the game, but don't) are greater than the losses they are creating for themselves.

Re:Reality

[reub2000]

Well a SNAFU like this will get more people to understand what the nerds have been complaining about. Hopefully the number of people the are discontent with DRM will grow large enough that it can't be ignored.

Re:Reality

[Anonymous Coward]

Despite all the online rage, SimCity sold much better than EA expected it to, and that's why the servers crashed.

Did the game sell so well because the DRM prevented people from pirating it? Who knows, but that probably will be EA's executive conclusion.

Note a similar thing happened with Diablo III and the game sold 11M copies, and is one of all-time top selling PC games.

Re:Reality

[Opportunist]

The little devil inside me doesn't think that they "outsold their expectations", but simply that they knew people would put up with any crap anyway, that their current server makeup will suffice in a month or two and that there's no need to put in more just 'cause their customers are pissed off. They'll come back anyway, they're dumb enough.

Re:Reality

[Anonymous Coward]

Despite all the online rage, SimCity sold much better than EA expected it to, and that's why the servers crashed.

I find it hilarious that someone, anyone, would actually believe such a statement...

I certainly don't believe it.

The great thing about mobile games

[SuperKendall]

A really great aspect of mobile game development is that while game makers can expect you probably will have networking, they can't rely on it always working. So while they can build features that make good use of networking they can't really make games that don't work when disconnected.

Re:The great thing about mobile games

[Atomic Fro]

A really great aspect of mobile game development is that while game makers can expect you probably will have networking, they can't rely on it always working. So while they can build features that make good use of networking they can't really make games that don't work when disconnected.

So, the exact same conditions of the PC platform, except mobile developers respect their customers.

Don't buy proprietary games! Pay libre developers.

[Anonymous Coward]

I stopped paying for proprietary software years ago. Now I (and my company) contribute significant sums of money to free software development. So far I haven't regretted it for a minute. The return on the investment in free software development has greatly outweighed its cost and our business model is not software development. We don't make any money on software development.

Meaningless

[onyxruby]

They are unrepentant about the DRM issue that caused the problem and have been busy spinning it as a popularity issue instead. They have no plans or intention of changing their ways and hope that this offering smooths over a public relations debacle.

This game, and EA themselves need to be boycotted for the good of the industry until such time as EA repents and changes their ways. A grassroots boycott that costs them far more money than their imaginary losses from piracy is the only thing that can get them to change.

Re:Meaningless

[Anonymous Coward]

well they're doing a great job isolating themselves from customers. I doubt I will buy another EA title. they managed to make bf3 a bit of an arseache with origin but being a fan of bf from the start I persevered. Then they shortened mass effect 3.. made a short and appalling medal of honor warfighter single player with shit mp and last straw for me is the length and ease of crysis 3, buggy mp with no one playing. Its not just the DRM. Its also the quality of game they release. Always really buggy for one. But the most unforgivable thing they do for me is they ruin games by creating sequels dummed down for the masses where the game no longer resembles what made the game different and interesting and instead made more of the same ole shit with the original game title. Now they try to milk us even more with different versions of the same shit and transactions in game. look at how battlefield is more run and gun than previous; crysis losing the suit modes & having crap mp; mass effect losing npc interactions & dumming down; deadspace no longer being a horror game; the list goes on and on. EA can go suck on lemons. This Simcity fiasco should be a wake up call to them but nothing will change since they dont give a crap about keeping customers happy and carry on thinking short term profit is all that matters.

"It's because it's so popular!!" was great spin.

[Anonymous Coward]

How about, nobody logs off because if they do, they can't ever get back on?

This is almost like...

[mark-t]

Imagine if you had a plumber in to do some work, and they warrantied the labor on their work, such that they would come back at no additional charge if there were any problems with the work that they did. Only a week or so later, the pipe starts leaking, leaving no doubt whatsoever that they did an incompetent job. You can get them to come back in to fix it, per their alleged warranty, but do you really want a plumber who evidently does that poor a job actually doing any more work on your place?

I've found the game!

[Nova Express]

Here's the free game EA will be offering.

They've learned nothing

[Tridus]

And as a result, I'll continue to not buy the game.

Sooner or later EA is going to piss off too many people with shoddy service, and they'll be in real trouble. It'd actually be nice if the game tanked due to nonsense like this: it'd be a warning to the rest of the industry.

This is equivalent to "Let them eat cake"

[asm2750]

I hope EA rots in hell after their customers take them to the fiscal guillotine.

beta was a bad portent

[Kogun]

My son and I were looking forward to playing this until we played in the first beta. With a one hour limit on play time, practically no new content to be experienced in that beta, and some really oddball bugs, I knew a decent play experience would have to be several months away. It is clear the imminent release data was driven by forces outside of the developers' authority. This was not a milestone driven release schedule, therefore, ignore all the spin coming from EA marketing. The game is in alpha, even now. The improvement they report for server access can be explained by customers staying away in droves.

buy one turd get another one free? No thanks.

[Dan667]

I stopped buy ea games years ago and have been much happier gaming since.

But wait, there's more!

[garyoa1]

Since there's a no return policy on opened software in the US, a ton of folks are just canceling their CC payments if they bought it thru a retail store. And since there's no way to return it, they still have it sitting on their shelves. So if they decide to play it... they can. EA would have no record of the "voided" key code and no way to get it. So the DRM didn't stop pirating, it just created thousands of new ones!

With all that in mind the only ones here getting burnt are the retailers. Not EA. Unless they have some sort of reimbursement plan in mind for them. Say a store had 1000 copies and got hit with 500 charge backs that they never get back... Could put some smaller stores out of business.

That being said, this fiasco not only hurts us, but the retailers will likely think twice about ordering anything from EA every again.

Big and Floppy

[Anonymous Coward]

That game is like getting smacked in the face by a big floppy donkey dick, I'll pass.

No more DRM

[Anonymous Coward]

After the Diablo 3 disaster of DRM requiring being always connected even to play as single player, never never again will I purchase another game with this kind of DRM

How about 2 free games?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well since you can't return an opened game, tons are just cancelling their CC payment. So essentially you can go out and buy it, cancel the payment and have that and a free game to boot. The shop owner will know where the CC cancel came from but no one at EA would have a clue which key code to cancel.

EA can suck my arse

[Osgeld]

I am not paying 60 bucks to be at the mercy of your servers just to play sim fucking city, and tanks for renforcing that to me by not being able to keep up with demand of your own product, did you not look at how many copies you sold?

Sorry EA, but I just can't fall for this again

[Anonymous Coward]

A few years ago I grabbed myself a nice copy of Battlefield 2, having owned a bunch of the BF1942 and related products. I fragged people, tanks, and generally had fun. Then one day out of the blue I decided to double click BF2 icon and launch into a game and...."You are banned". Hmm, oh well, maybe this server is just broken, let me try another...."You are banned".

Apparently there was a problem about a year ago where someone was able to blacklist a bunch of BF2 user id's via punkbuster, and now I can never play my BF2 again on any server unless I use a non punkbuster one (which there are only like what 4 of them, and filled with cheaters?). So I am sorry EA, but I don't think I can take a chance wasting money on your third party DRM'd games again.

Reminds me of some of the Amazon comments

[Moraelin]

At least on Amazon.de there were a couple of comments to the effect of, "Well, they couldn't have guessed that all the idiots who paid a lot of money for a game actually intend to play it." :p

EA is stupid and self-destructive but...

[Anonymous Coward]

EA is stupid and self-destructive but we should really spend time thinking "why?". The answer, sadly, is simple. EA has a management that is both educationally sub-normal, and yet unaccountable. We've all met vicious moronic people who are convinced their ideas are the best ever, regardless of their academic background and lack of any track-record. Oft-times, these types worm their way into upper management, especially in companies that have previously had periods of success independent of management activity.

The games industry is notorious for having the worst possible management- and easily the most corrupt and criminal. Managers have been caught over and over attempting to 'emulate' 'Hollywood accounting' by ensuring games never seem to turn a profit, because the money made goes in outrageous management salaries, bonuses, and none returnable loans. EA and Activision are easily the two biggest offenders.

Criminal type managers are notorious for having a vicious and vindictive attitude toward their own customers. But simply, they think their customers are 'scum' - 'scum' to be exploited in any way that is still likely to keep the managers out of jail.

An ordinary person might naively think that EA would be thankful for a person handing over $60 for SimCity, and wish to have that customer leave happy. Nothing could be further from the truth. That initial transaction is like when an old person makes a first payment to criminal builders who go door-to-door looking for vulnerable suckers. That first payment tell the criminal builders that they now have a chance to bleed dry the bank account of the old person.

You go "but why, oh why would EA choose to behave like this?". I'm sorry, you're not facing reality. The reason is simple. EA has employed the worst kind of nasty scum to manage its company. These people have no business or industry skills. These people got the job PRECISELY because they are sharks with no conscience. EA owners became famously bewitched by the success of Zynga, a company owned and run by an admitted criminal whose business model is stealing other people's games, and paying court fines when necessary. EA had no success themselves with Zynga's business model, but while trying to emulate Zynga, they hired managers they thought were most sympathetic with the concept.

EA is damaging itself massively with this behaviour. It recently bombed in its attempt to take on the COD franchise with its MOH franchise. Battlefield 4 is due to suffer the same fate as MOH and SimCity, as EA refuses to release the product customers want to use. EA's ownership of DICE will destroy DICE (it's pretty much finished already).

Re:EA is stupid and self-destructive but...

[fireylord]

EA is stupid and self-destructive but we should really spend time thinking "why?". The answer, sadly, is simple. EA has a management that is both educationally sub-normal, and yet unaccountable. We've all met vicious moronic people who are convinced their ideas are the best ever, regardless of their academic background and lack of any track-record. Oft-times, these types worm their way into upper management, especially in companies that have previously had periods of success independent of management activity.

The games industry is notorious for having the worst possible management- and easily the most corrupt and criminal. Managers have been caught over and over attempting to 'emulate' 'Hollywood accounting' by ensuring games never seem to turn a profit, because the money made goes in outrageous management salaries, bonuses, and none returnable loans. EA and Activision are easily the two biggest offenders.

Criminal type managers are notorious for having a vicious and vindictive attitude toward their own customers. But simply, they think their customers are 'scum' - 'scum' to be exploited in any way that is still likely to keep the managers out of jail.

An ordinary person might naively think that EA would be thankful for a person handing over $60 for SimCity, and wish to have that customer leave happy. Nothing could be further from the truth. That initial transaction is like when an old person makes a first payment to criminal builders who go door-to-door looking for vulnerable suckers. That first payment tell the criminal builders that they now have a chance to bleed dry the bank account of the old person.

You go "but why, oh why would EA choose to behave like this?". I'm sorry, you're not facing reality. The reason is simple. EA has employed the worst kind of nasty scum to manage its company. These people have no business or industry skills. These people got the job PRECISELY because they are sharks with no conscience. EA owners became famously bewitched by the success of Zynga, a company owned and run by an admitted criminal whose business model is stealing other people's games, and paying court fines when necessary. EA had no success themselves with Zynga's business model, but while trying to emulate Zynga, they hired managers they thought were most sympathetic with the concept.

EA is damaging itself massively with this behaviour. It recently bombed in its attempt to take on the COD franchise with its MOH franchise. Battlefield 4 is due to suffer the same fate as MOH and SimCity, as EA refuses to release the product customers want to use. EA's ownership of DICE will destroy DICE (it's pretty much finished already).

Sorry not trying to defend EA per se but can you cite some kind of source for these allegations?

Spectacularly defeats the purpose of DRM too

[Moraelin]

You know, it just occurs to me... their problem with piracy and with second hand games is that someone gets to play one of EA's games, and EA doesn't get paid for it.

So let me get this straight, the result of putting the idiotic DRM in SimCity, is... that now a LOT of people get to play one of EA's (other) games, and EA doesn't get paid for it.

Sure, most of those wouldn't have bought the other EA game, but then neither would have most pirates. That is, outside of putting the BS in BSA.

But if you do the the maths BSA style, where every single copy downloaded is a lost sale -- and you just know whoever came up with that over-the-top DRM is -- yeah, great job, EA. Did you need a scope to shoot yourself in the foot so neatly, or is it a natural talent?

No, seriously, releasing SimCity without DRM would have probably resulted in less people playing an unpaid copy, AND saved them from all the negative publicity and angry customers.

Re:Spectacularly defeats the purpose of DRM too

[bugnuts]

... releasing SimCity without DRM would have probably resulted in less people playing an unpaid copy [of one of EA's games], AND saved them from all the negative publicity and angry customers.

Best quote I've read all day.

It's slightly weakened by some of the online aspects, but certainly should apply to the single-player mode.

Re:Spectacularly defeats the purpose of DRM too

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, you misunderstood the point of DRM.

The purpose of DRM is to make e.g. EA believe they can enforce the artificial scarcity, so they can continue to take real original money we earned with hard work, in return for a mere worthless copy of the original work they let others work hard for. Those others were, of course, paid only a single time, not per copy, and were generally treated like slaves*.

Yes, it's a crime. On so many levels... Fraud, usury, harassment, racketeering (when you get a letter from their lawyers), you name it...

And best of all, DRM cannot ever possibly work. It’s literally physically impossible, to hand somebody a safe, and a key to it, that a machine he owns and controls can use, to open the safe and look inside, and expect him not to be able to have access to the safe. (You'd need the machine to be under their control. Hence TCPA chips and encrypting everything until it reaches your senses. Until they notice that our brains can make copies too! ^^)
___
* I remember that lawsuit of the wives of EA employees against EA, because their husbands didn't come home anymore, because the EA bosses told them: "If you leave... even on week-ends... you don't have to come back." I also know two guys who worked at EA, and as a result became alcoholics. They weren't the exception.

Re:Spectacularly defeats the purpose of DRM too

[Anonymous Coward]

given they're not removing the drm, i'd say they'll lose even more people waiting out for a pirated copy
hell even people that bought the game will likely go for the pirated copy as it's a better experience

also knowing EA the free "pc game" will likely be one from nearly a decade ago, or downloadable content from a none-to-popular game

Re:Spectacularly defeats the purpose of DRM too

[SwedishPenguin]

Exactly, the DRM is counter-productive. I was considering getting SimCity, I've been a fan of the SimCity series since I was a kid, but the problems with the DRM (combined with the outrageous price, about twice as much as I used to pay for boxed games including a manual, where there was a whole chain of distributors and manufacturers who needed their cut, for a *download*), I'm considering either not getting it at all or pirating it when the crack comes. I'm not paying that much money in order to be screwed out of playing the game single player due to a freaking server overloading, not to mention the problems with wine and Origin (the game apparently otherwise works fine in wine) meaning I would have to be completely cut-off from anything productive while playing.

I did impulse buy Civ5 Gold (even though I already had Civ 5 around somewhere, but not the expansions) the other day when they had a special, even installed Steam in wine to do it, first time I used Steam. I bet they would earn way more money with prices more geared towards impulse buys.

Single player for On-The-Road

[data2]

I often travel a few hours by train or other measures, where I have lots of free time on my hands. I would have loved buying simcity 5, and very nearly did, but then heard about the always on requirement. Which frankly, just doesn't make sense for this kind of game.
Also losing my save-state when the internet connection at home goes down: Who designs crap like that?

another EA game?

[bitt3n]

haven't these people suffered enough?

Actually, I think they did consider the use-case

[Moraelin]

Actually, considering how the game works, I'm 100% convinced that it's the result of EA considering the single-player case... except in EA management lingo that use-case sounds a bit like, "OMG, gazillions of people will pirate our game, or buy it used on EBay."

Seriously, the game IS at heart a single player game. I've managed to squeeze in between server crashes and start a game or two, and guess what? The game functions exactly the same when the server crashes while you're in your city.

The lie that the game is too complex for a single CPU and they need to do server-side processing too, was just that: a lie. The only "server-side processing" they do is saving the game and publishing your game events.

But here's the funny thing: Steam for example manages just fine to send your achievements to the server in the background, without needing the game to be tethered to a server all the time. Skyrim, Fallout New Vegas, A Game Of Dwarves, etc, take your pick, they're all single player games that Steam can both provide DRM for and save the achievements (and for some even the save games) on their server without pretending it's an online game.

So anyway, the game IS perfectly able to run single player. It's not a real client-server product like WoW or EA's own TOR. It doesn't need a server or a server emulator to play exactly the same. It's a single player game, which is perfectly able to function without a server, plus some artificial tethering to their servers that doesn't really add much.

So why IS a single player mode missing at least as an official option to start the game, when the game functions perfectly well in single player?

It seems to me like the only reasonable explanation is that they considered single-player offline mode as something to prevent.

More of the same

[Mobius Evalon]

The problem becomes that regardless of how this works out, EA isn't accountable. If you boycott the game and don't buy it, EA assumes this is entirely the fault of the game or developer. If you do buy it, EA thinks you're apathetic or complacent about whatever silly DRM they've employed and will continue using and/or cooking up crappy new anti-consumer methods. Unfortunately, the better scenario is buying the game. You have to support titles and developers you like, despite the evil publishing facility they've decided to use or have been stuck with.

At the same time, I'm glad to see these stories about server issues caused by shitty DRM. I hope it continues to draw attention to how all of their paying customers are being treated like thieves.

origin

[Anonymous Coward]

At least all these people were able to actually BUY the game to learn that it was complete crap. Origin has not accepted any form on my payments for quite some time. When I called their support number, i was on hold for nearly an Hour with no resolutions. Well here is my resolution EA. NO MORE MONEY FROM ME!

It was fun while it lasted.

[Anonymous Coward]

I am guessing someone else will step up and provide a good player experience for me.
The only time i play the dumb shit was traveling in the RV.

DRM is the least of the problems...

[Shakrai]

DRM is the least of the problems with this game. They took what is inherently a single player game and turned it into social networking garbage. The online only model deprives you of the ability to play Sim City on the train, airplane, or litany of other unconnected places where you might want to play by yourself to pass the time. It deprives you of the ability to save your game, blow the city to hell with disasters, and resume playing afterwards. People might laugh at this, but that has been a huge part of the Sim City experience since the very first release in 1989. The servers don't speak to each other, so if you create a game on server A and have to use Server B tomorrow you can't play the city you spent hours creating. All of this is a huge problem, and that's without taking into account the DRM and completely inadequate server infrastructure.

The server model doesn't even make financial sense for EA -- ongoing expense for a one-time sale -- unless of course they intend to turn this game into a bunch of downloadable content where they "add" features (that have existed since Sim City 2000, i.e., subways and large maps) every few months for $20 a pop. This is almost certainly their plan, because it's the only way the server model can work without becoming a money pit.

I have played this game since I was ten years old and got the SNES version for Christmas. My sister and I used to spend hours in the public library playing Sim City 2000 before we had our first PC, saving our games on 5.25" floppy disks so we could play again tomorrow. I met many of my online friends -- most of whom I still communicate with -- through an old Majordomo mailing list that I found in a book about Sim City 2000. Hell, Sim City 2000 got me online in the first place. I learned how to make my own scenarios with nothing more than a hex editor and patience. I ignored the eye candy and stupid crossovers with The Sims in Sim City 3000 and Sim City 4 because they were at least smart enough to improve upon the underlying simulation model and keep it true to the franchise.

Disappointment does not begin to describe my feelings about this game, which was the first video game I've shelled out my coin for in five years. No, I'm not a pirate, I've just lost interest in gaming in general as I've aged, but this one had me genuinely excited in spite of my concerns about the online model and DRM. Guess I should have known better. I was one of the lucky ones, got a effortless (except for waiting two hours in chat queue) refund without any argument even though I bought it from Origin. Saved me the hassle of doing a credit card charge back, which is something I would highly recommend for anyone who can't get a refund through other channels. Vote with your wallet, it's the only thing EA understands.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Opportunist]

I am also old enough to remember the "old days" of Sim City. Sim City was why I bought that ram extension for my Amiga. Sim City 2000 was why I traveled 50 miles on a bus to the only town around where it was available (and it almost costed me graduation in the end).

SC3000, SC4, I bought them all, played them all, (actually bought SC4 twice, long story) and I was quite a bit excited when I heard that 5 was coming. Luckily I was wary enough when I heard what EA plans with it and my gut feeling was right.

So I won't get it. Cities XL looks mighty tempting now, though.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[anagama]

I used to play simcity a long time ago, and by that I mean a very early or the earliest version. Then I found Civilization and never played simcity again, but that's beside the point. It seems to me that the simcity game was pretty hardcore on the antipiracy stuff even in the early days. If I recall correctly, to load the game you had to type in something from a printed table that came with the game disk, but it was printed in black text on dark burgundy colored paper. This prevented photocopying, but it also made it hard to read in anything but bright light. The other effect was that if you couldn't find the paper and couldn't get a copy, you couldn't play your game. For all you whipersnappers, locating a readable duplicate in the pre-public-internet days wasn't like googling up something today.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[anagama]

Wow -- life before search engines must have been hard. I lived it and can't even remember what it was like.

Anyway, this is the code sheet I was talking about:
http://www.vintagecomputing.com/wp-content/images/copyprotection/simcity_large.jpg

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[dead_user]

Yeah. When I was about 7 I had a hand-drawn copy of that table. *grin*

Monty Python's Flying Circus had my favorite one though, where you had to identify different types of cheese.

ftp://ftp.worldofspectrum.org/pub/sinclair/games-extras/MontyPythonsFlyingCircus_CheeseGuide.gif

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Cwix]

So I won't get it. Cities XL looks mighty tempting now, though.

I thought the same thing. Its good, but its not quite Simcity 2k good.

Personally I am getting my kicks in Tropico right now. Just think Simcity in Cuba.
Steam has the complete pack with all DLC for ten bucks this weekend.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[coastwalker]

Stuff EA, wont be buying any of their product. When are corporations going to learn that we don't want to buy subscriptions to their products. As Douglas Adams would say. Death is too good for them. All of them. Particularly Microsoft with its free 'cloud' service for Office and win 8. Screw the lot of the thieving bastards.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[SoCalChris]

That sheet brings back memories. That scheme was less annoying than the Monkey Island wheel, or games that wouldn't let you start it without having to type in the third word of the sixth paragraph of page 43. I always liked the Leisure Suit Larry questions though, they were at least amusing.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Opportunist]

Already got it, already played through it. It was a bit of a letdown when I got it, T4 was pretty much a T3 with some new bells and whistles, but with 10 bucks you can't go wrong, the new campaigns alone are worth 10 bucks easily, and the modern times addon sure gives it a new little twist here and there. Plus, by now there's quite a few player made maps out there that are pretty decent too.

And if everything fails, there's still sandbox mode. My only complaint would probably be that it's a bit too easy. But hey, it works and doesn't crash, I guess these days you actually have to mention that (ok, not 100% true, it did crash at me once when a few freak happenings occurred at the same time).

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Opportunist]

The most hilarious doc-check protection I can remember was the one for ELITE, IIRC for the Atari ST. The doc-check itself was straight forward, but when, instead of looking up the word in the manual, you typed in the code word to get access to the hex editor it would always ask for the same word from page 16... I forgot the rest.

It was then that I always enabled the cheat mode even if I didn't plan to cheat, it allowed me to play the game without reaching for the manual each time.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[mrchaotica]

They must have backed off by the time they started calling it "SimCity Classic" though; that's the version I had and it required no such code sheet.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well said, this "game" was clearly developed by people who doesn't understand what Simcity is all about. They just want to use the brand name to milk as much cash from the fans by putting everything online.

I am sure they have something like "Buy extra building/road design for $" in their plans.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Anonymous Coward]

"(and it almost costed me graduation in the end)."

Costed? And they gave you a diploma?

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Cederic]

It deprives you of the ability to save your game, blow the city to hell with disasters, and resume playing afterwards. People might laugh at this, but that has been a huge part of the Sim City experience since the very first release in 1989.

A huge part? It's been the best part!

Losing that capability destroys the game completely for people that are interested in the 'what if' scenarios rather than a linear progession.

Can my city survive a flood/fire/bridge collapse/attack from a renowned overgrown Japanese reptile?

Shit, next you'll be telling me this messed up version doesn't support infinite cash hacks?

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[pellik]

They took what is inherently a single player game and turned it into social networking garbage.

Funny, what I remember from Sim City 4 was that the one key use of regions was off-loading your trash to a neighbor. Now you have multi-player regions, so social networking your garbage sounds exactly right.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[anagama]

LSL3 was one of the first games I bought, then I went back and played 1 & 2. The questions to ensure you were old enough to play were amusing, but also indicative of how a searchable internet has changed everything. In the early 90s, you actually had to know the answers, know someone who knew the answers, or visit a library. Now it's three words in a google search (lsl3 questions age):

http://www.allowe.com/Larry/3questions.htm

And an interesting history of copy discouraging techniques for LSL:
http://www.allowe.com/Larry/cluescheats.htm

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[tragedy]

I remember I lost the manual for _Kings Quest IV_ back in the day. Had to keep loading and reloading the game until it asked the question about a word starting with "b" on the verb list, for which I knew the answer was "bridle". I also had a hand drawn copy of the Sim City code sheet as a backup.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[ultranova]

Can my city survive a flood/fire/bridge collapse/attack from a renowned overgrown Japanese reptile?

Oh yeah. Start a fire or a riot in SC2000, let the game run for a while (make the viewpoint window as small as possible to maximize speed), and enjoy your firestorm/open rebellion.

Or the original, where fires could rage for decades as the city grew around the burning squares.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[anagama]

True -- I forgot the process of elimination. But I think that only serves to prove the point of how much easier things are in the post public-internet world. It surely took you more than a five second google search to tease out the answers.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Samizdata]

Yeah, I know...this guy...that back in the days of manual protection would go to his local self-service copy shop and run off full copies of all the books.

Re:DRM is the least of the problems...

[Cwix]

Never played 3, so its a completely new game for me.
I will say my biggest complaint is that it takes forever for them to get around to building anything. That and the tornadoes that take 2 game years to play out. Just let me know what fell down. That and I would appreciate some more numbers and heat maps. OK, just those three things.

I suppose this game isn't quite SC2K either.

Re:Why buy one when you can buy two for twice the.

[Opportunist]

That's like offering the drowning guy another stone and chain for the other ankle.

you know what else is funny..

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet the DRM hindered their beta test also as far as a local test went and getting benchmarks. Instead of using an automated tool/script to load up their servers locally and see at what point resource wise they would croak, they had to rely on a 24 hour 'the world comes to us to test it'. When they saw it ran decently with 1000 people they were like 'hell yea success!'

But since they didn't test it correctly and try to 'max out' their resources to know when it *would* croak when the server saw 30,000 people show up it died.

So not only does DRM hinder the consumer, it hinders EA from even testing their shitty products correctly.. I'm amused.

Timing is everything...

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting to me, they are giving more details on March 18, 2013. And anyone that bought the "Digital Deluxe" from Origin got a $20 off $30 or more purchase code.

Anyone want to guess when that code expires? I'll give you a hint - it expires before you get more details on the free game.

Amazon ratings

[bugnuts]

Rating systems, especially on amazon, are far from accurate.

Many people use ratings solely for retribution when they really have an issue with a product or the way they were treated, even when they wouldn't normally rate a product. This is one of the reasons yelp ratings have such issues -- yelp tried to deal with the retribution aspect by disqualifying singleton bad ratings. This means the person that had a really bad experience and posted about it never gets heard, and is buried by people who give several ratings, often being paid to post good ratings.

Ratings usually reflect less about the product, but a lot about the purchaser's feelings about the product. Companies that are popular get better ratings even if their products are inferior. In this case, EA pissed off a bunch of gamers who generally don't like DRM simply because it's annoying, and it bit them badly. Now a bunch of gamers are leaving 1-star ratings on amazon because the servers were down for two days -- not because the game isn't really good when it's playable.

Vote with your VOTE

[bugnuts]

There should be legislation that forces purchased software (licenses) must be transferable (striking all EULAs restricting that), and if someone buys add-ons for software and subsequently transfers that software, those addons must be transferable with it (even if from different companies). That would include downloadable content.

The whole ability for companies to be able to write felonies into their EULAs through abusing of the Computer Crime "illegal access" and requiring online connections needs to stop.

We need legislators that actually care about consumers.

Re:Vote with your VOTE

[Anonymous Coward]

There already is (in that the legal principle exists and is established)- its called the "Exhaustion doctrine" or "first sale principle" etc - In the EU its being fairly solidly established that this principle applies exactly the same to 'virtual' or electronic producrts as much as it does to books, cars etc.

eg see http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2012-07/cp120094en.pdf

or http://www.zdnet.com/oracle-cannot-block-the-resale-of-its-software-in-europe-7000000189/

The same principle appears to be an established fact of law in the USA.

It seems in practice software vendors ignore it, or make it difficult to resale, eg through 'user accounts" and online requirements.

My expectation is that a real case would fall in the favour of freedom of resale - but I'm no lawyer or lawmaker.

EA fucked up?

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy crap, I did not see that coming.

They are unrepentant about the online because...

[Ratchet]

the simulation is run "in the cloud" and not on your local PC. They can't disconnect because of that, and that is also why the cities are so small and why their servers are having such a hard time coping with the load.

Many other games out there

[Anonymous Coward]

There are many other games out there, so I will not be playing this or any other game by EA.

Re:Actually, I think they did consider the use-cas

[Darinbob]

There is no possible way that server side processing can ever be better than local processing. It only works in the cases of having gigantic databases (ie, web searches). For raw processing power you'll to better processing locally than transmitting data back and forth to a slightly faster processor.

Re:They are unrepentant about the online because..

[Arker]

And they are only "in the cloud" because EA thought that would be a real neat way to enforce effective DRM, as well as push their upsells.

Well, that much is clear

[Moraelin]

Well, that much is clear.

In fact, here's a thought: they said that the processing was so complex, they had to do some of it on their servers. But... if my still fairly top of the line 4 cpu / 8 thread Intel couldn't do it... what was EA going to do that actually makes a difference? Add one more CPU of their own for everyone who plays at a given time? Yeah, I'm so going to believe that they'll buy a 1 million CPU server farm just to handle everyone at launch. NOT.

So, yeah, it was clear that they're just shovelling ridiculous BS and hoping that enough morons would actually believe that.

The sad part, though, is that I've actually seen morons repeating it in excuse of the crashing servers fiasco.

Re:Well, that much is clear

[Anonymous Coward]

The only way it could win is if they needed custom hardware acceleration and build the boards that do it.

Actually, now that makes me wonder

[Moraelin]

Actually, now that I said that only morons would believe EA's BS about the CPU not being enough for their game, and that they're actually processing your city on the server... it kinda makes me wonder if they ARE trying to get morons as a target demographic.

I was reading a paper a few months ago about Nigerian widow scams and such. The question they had basically asked themselves was: why those scams don't try to be a little less ridiculous and more plausible? Why don't they try to snag more people?

Their conclusion was that basically the scammers don't really want everyone. They actually want only the morons, who are more likely to then go through with it. If a smart person gets tipped off that it's bogus... GOOD! That's one less dead end to waste time on.

So I'm thinking, hmmmm, maybe that's EA's plan. Maybe they do want to reach the morons. More morons with money probably means more crap DLCs sold down the line :p

Re:Actually, now that makes me wonder

[Anonymous Coward]

You could be right. On the other hand that means: A) they've pretty much abandoned the rather dedicated fan base that loved previous Sim City games; B) they're going to have one hell of a lot of credit-card charge backs and refunds to deal with from the non-moron fans that decided to try it anyway, just in case it wasn't as bad as they expected.

People are just NOW learning their EA lesson?

[Bonker]

Seriously, I learned this a while back with the first 'Black and White' game. EA pushed the developer to release early. The game was simply unfinished. You literally could not finish it.

The 'patch' to fix that gawdawful mess broke gameplay so badly, I said 'Fuck it. This was wasted money. Fool me once, shame on you. No more money for you, EA!"

Mrs. Bonker came to the same decision some time later, after endless frustrations with the 'Sims 3'. She realized that a) she was essentially re-buying all the expansions for the 'Sims 2' one at a time and b) none of them worked. They were all so horrendously buggy that the game could quite seriously corrupt a filesystem.

It was painful for her since she really enjoys The Sims gameplay, but she's stuck playing 'The Sims 2' because she realized she was literally throwing her money away every time she purchased something for the 'The Sims 3'

Re: People are just NOW learning their EA lesson?

[Pirate_Pettit]

She didn't miss much - the 'integrated neighborhood' that sims 3 instituted actually reduced the ways you could play significantly and made it harder to design multiple households, and the huge reduction in stuff in the shop - only to have it reappear in the expensive online store - was a naked cash grab. Plus, like you said, all the older play features being re-added as expansions later.
Sims 2 was the better title, by far. I went back to it, and couldn't be happier. Also? No EA sign-in!

Re: People are just NOW learning their EA lesson?

[Anonymous Coward]

because she realized she was literally throwing her money away every time she purchased something for the 'The Sims 3'

And by "literally" you mean, "actually not literally at all, but I'm feeling very emphatic right now."

Re: People are just NOW learning their EA lesson?

[neminem]

No, in this case, it does look like he means "literally" - unless you're complaining because he isn't literally putting physical bills into a physical trash can? But I'd argue that sending money electronically something with the promise of a particular thing in return, and then not actually being able to use the thing you got in return (because it relies on a game being stable, that isn't), is close enough to throwing it away that the phrase fits...

Cities XL is no better.

[kcbnac]

Go read the forums on Steam - linked here for ease: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=742

The original devs are all gone, they're basically adding a few new structures and calling it a new release, it still has some game-breaking bugs that have persisted for 3 or 4 releases now.

I highly recommend Tropico 4 - you end up with more control over individual structures than you did with the Sim City series, but it is equally fun.

Steam even has the Collector's Bundle (Game + Expansion + all the DLCs) on sale for $9.99 through March 15, 2013. http://store.steampowered.com/sub/19282/

Sadly, Tropico 4 has an online-required component - you have to create an account and sign in to launch it each time. About the only issue I have with it, otherwise it is awesome. (I haven't tried it offline, my laptop won't run it well so I play other games when traveling)

Re:Cities XL is no better.

[TomatoCo]

Tropico 4's sign in system checks if you have a net connection. If you do, you HAVE to sign in. If you don't, it doesn't even show the sign in, it just loads right away. Very odd, but it is hardly online-required.

I don t understand you guys

[Anonymous Coward]

For the pas 4-5years all the games have been like this. Steam anyone?
You re acting like this is something new. Everyone wants your data. What you play what you watch the can sell that shit.

EA will get bought out

[Anonymous Coward]

They were negotiating with private equity firms last year, asking for $20 a share. That would make the cost of buying them exactly 6 billion dollars.

EA's reputation is going down the toilet, but they still have a lot of big franchises and some great dev teams (despite everything!).

Lots of companies could afford EA - Activision Blizzard with its current market cap of $16.5 billion would be a candidate. I'm hoping that EA shares drop substantially so that Valve could afford to buy them up.

Launching Problems

[Anonymous Coward]

So glad to see that it's not just my disk screwing up. It takes me to the launch screen, starts loading something for an hour, then it says "Error" and quits out. So frustrated! EA should have done a better preparation for this. Unbelievably annoyed.

just another chapter

[Anonymous Coward]

Granted EA is a terrible company, but this isn't even about EA, it's about everyone who's caught up in playing games on the computer. It's maddening that we're spending so much money on games. Who in their right mind pays $60 for Sim City, or any game? The reason: the product is hyped up and marketed to oblivion. What ever happened to the golden years when companies released demos of the game? Remember the days of Lord Soth and Happy Puppy? Well those functional models of gaming were utterly betrayed by the super-companies that only seek to control all aspects of gaming. It will take time, but if the super companies continue to behave like spoiled brats I'm not going to buy any games from any firm, or for that matter any Indy game company flaunting artificial moral superiority. It'll be ASCII games, Spelunky, and for the time being Gmod and Minecraft. I hope people who are working on Linux operating systems understand the value of having games function, look at windows 3.1 and Doom.

No thanks!

[Toddthedork]

I haven't given EA a penny since they destroyed Ultima Online over a decade ago, and that won't be changing anytime soon.

How about a refund for the iPhone version..

[PortHaven]

Which had a bug in which you could not get water to your city. Build all the water you want....the city still died of thirst.

Civitas

[phorm]

That one seems a little dodgy at the moment. Yeah, good idea and nice shots, but there's only one identified "developer" and even he isn't being very forthcoming about his experience/history.
Could just be he's a kickstarter newbie, but if that's the case what's the chance of him (and/or "the team) getting a functional game out in a reasonable timeline?

you mean people bought it?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised that so many people did end up buying it. The internet backlash was so fierce for this launch that I almost thought it would flop on us. But here we are again, overwhelming success to the shitty company for a shitty game, and not a single lesson learned by anyone.

I for sure thought that this would finally be the game that people actually don't buy when they say that they aren't gonna buy EA games anymore :rolleyes:

boo freaking hoo

[Anonymous Coward]

in this day and age tons of games are going to this always online necessity to play, not just the sims. Connectivity is honestly becomming less and less of an issue every day due to ever expanding hotspots and things. Tons of games have shitty shitty launch days(see every game blizzard ever released and SWTOR). EA, however, has been the only one to come out and say that bad launch days aren't something people should have to deal with so here's a free game for you to say sorry. I say kudos, EA, you're on the right track.