Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Is it possible that EA will remove DRM from Simcity?

2»

Comments

  • ElikalElikal ValhallaPosts: 7,904Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SlickShoes
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    It's a fraud. Sim City 5 is an Online game and should have been name "Sim City Online". As it is, people had to assume it would be somewhat like the other Sim Cities, a single player game. Which it isn't. It's simply deception and fraud.

    Deception and fraud...based off the title alone? Nobody likes DRM...but lets not get all batshit crazy and imply that all the warnings in every aricle, all the descriptions on any retailer's advratisieng, all over the the games box cover etc, did not give ample warning about being always online.

    Imagine tomorrow you buy a car, say a GM. And in one year, GM goes bankrupt, and because of that you can never drive your car anymore because it's function is online bound to the GM servers. I suppose you would by all right be pissed. People buy SimCity because of the NAME, because of the HISTORY. They assume a game of the same name is the same. That's why Ultima Online was named "ONLINE" and not just "Ultima", so to assure you don't deceive fans of the single player series. It's deception and I am damn sure they knew a lot would but SimCity because of the predecessors and not read some small printed stuff on the backside of the box.

    Proof: apparently the masses of customers were surprised and outraged and returned the game, because of the fraud implied in the title. Otherwise we would not HAVE the shitstorm we witness.

    So I am taking Blizzard to court now because World Of Warcraft does not have online in the title and it requires and always on connection.

    One of the requirements to run Sim City is an always on Internet connection, if you can't supply this then you do not meet the minimum requirements to run the game and should not buy it.

    I was annoyed when other games I used to play got shut down, but these things happen, it's in the terms an conditions you agree to when you play the game.

    Feeling well siding with the fraudulence rich company?

    There is jurisdictional fraud and there is moral fraud. Not all that the law allows is morally right. And your example is the worst possible. After 3 single player games named "Warcraft", Blizzard did NOT name their Online Game "Warcraft" but "WORLD of Warcraft", thus signifying "this is different", "this is NOT like the Warcraft single player games"!

    EA named their Online Game the same as the four single player games, thus misleading players to believe it would be like the previous games. I don't know about customer protection in America, but here in the EU we are very stern with such matters. The customer laws are much strikter here, thank goodness. German courts have repeatadly judged that just small notes on the backside are not enough. I am no lawyer, so my opinion is just that - opinion. But if were a judge I would clearly call it fraud and customer deception.

     

    Let me quote, from the bottom of my heart aggreeing, from RockPaperShotgun:

    "What EA and Maxis have done with SimCity is attempt a year-long PR assault to suggest that the online-only nature of SimCity is designed to offer enhancements for gamers. This is simply not true. It’s utter rubbish. It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two. The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact.

    To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It’s a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher’s burrowing.

    ... Always-on DRM is a disease that we cannot allow ourselves to be so willingly infected by. It’s a curse on gaming. It’s diminishing our experiences, reducing the possibilities for our play, and creating a space where faulty games are accepted as complete. Always-on DRM is a broken game. They need to be fixed."

    Source: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/11/simcity-is-inherently-broken-lets-not-let-this-go/

    THIS a 1000 times.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • birdycephonbirdycephon Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 1,314Member
    They added more servers, the game works fine now.
  • doodphacedoodphace Vancouver, BCPosts: 1,815Member
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by SlickShoes
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    It's a fraud. Sim City 5 is an Online game and should have been name "Sim City Online". As it is, people had to assume it would be somewhat like the other Sim Cities, a single player game. Which it isn't. It's simply deception and fraud.

    Deception and fraud...based off the title alone? Nobody likes DRM...but lets not get all batshit crazy and imply that all the warnings in every aricle, all the descriptions on any retailer's advratisieng, all over the the games box cover etc, did not give ample warning about being always online.

    Imagine tomorrow you buy a car, say a GM. And in one year, GM goes bankrupt, and because of that you can never drive your car anymore because it's function is online bound to the GM servers. I suppose you would by all right be pissed. People buy SimCity because of the NAME, because of the HISTORY. They assume a game of the same name is the same. That's why Ultima Online was named "ONLINE" and not just "Ultima", so to assure you don't deceive fans of the single player series. It's deception and I am damn sure they knew a lot would but SimCity because of the predecessors and not read some small printed stuff on the backside of the box.

    Proof: apparently the masses of customers were surprised and outraged and returned the game, because of the fraud implied in the title. Otherwise we would not HAVE the shitstorm we witness.

    So I am taking Blizzard to court now because World Of Warcraft does not have online in the title and it requires and always on connection.

    One of the requirements to run Sim City is an always on Internet connection, if you can't supply this then you do not meet the minimum requirements to run the game and should not buy it.

    I was annoyed when other games I used to play got shut down, but these things happen, it's in the terms an conditions you agree to when you play the game.

    Feeling well siding with the fraudulence rich company?

    There is jurisdictional fraud and there is moral fraud. Not all that the law allows is morally right. And your example is the worst possible. After 3 single player games named "Warcraft", Blizzard did NOT name their Online Game "Warcraft" but "WORLD of Warcraft", thus signifying "this is different", "this is NOT like the Warcraft single player games"!

    EA named their Online Game the same as the four single player games, thus misleading players to believe it would be like the previous games. I don't know about customer protection in America, but here in the EU we are very stern with such matters. The customer laws are much strikter here, thank goodness. German courts have repeatadly judged that just small notes on the backside are not enough. I am no lawyer, so my opinion is just that - opinion. But if were a judge I would clearly call it fraud and customer deception.

     

    Let me quote, from the bottom of my heart aggreeing, from RockPaperShotgun:

    "What EA and Maxis have done with SimCity is attempt a year-long PR assault to suggest that the online-only nature of SimCity is designed to offer enhancements for gamers. This is simply not true. It’s utter rubbish. It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two. The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact.

    To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It’s a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher’s burrowing.

    ... Always-on DRM is a disease that we cannot allow ourselves to be so willingly infected by. It’s a curse on gaming. It’s diminishing our experiences, reducing the possibilities for our play, and creating a space where faulty games are accepted as complete. Always-on DRM is a broken game. They need to be fixed."

    Source: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/11/simcity-is-inherently-broken-lets-not-let-this-go/

    THIS a 1000 times.

    Yet....there was no huge outrage from Final Fantasy XI...and that had a whopping TEN single player prequals...

    I don't think anyone is arguring that DRM isn't shit, so you can stop posting links attesting to that....but you have to drop the arguemtn that since the game did not have "online" in its title, its "fraud"

  • tawesstawess LkpgPosts: 2,535Member Uncommon
    Also i do not know what kind of argument "if ea goes out of biz" is... You buy the game knowing full well that it is online so i fail to see how it is a issue.
  • Paradigm68Paradigm68 New York, NYPosts: 884Member Uncommon

    This is a tweet from SimCity: "We have no intention of offlining SimCity any time soon but we'll look into that as part of our earning back your trust efforts."

    So yes that sounds likr it is possible. Probably around when the revenue stream from the online community dries up, they'll relase a standalonge patch/client to wring out some more earnings.

  • SephirosoSephiroso Marietta, GAPosts: 1,160Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    Some companies have a reputation to protect and some don't.  The Sim City fiasco won't do much to change EA's reputation, as anyone who cares about a company's reputation already would have been at least strongly skeptical of buying a game from EA even before this.

    I will never buy another blizzard game after the diablo 3 fiasco.  I long stopped buying EA games though,

    you wont be missed when the rest of the world is losing their lives to titan

    image
    Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

  • alkarionlogalkarionlog SPosts: 1,124Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by SlickShoes
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    It's a fraud. Sim City 5 is an Online game and should have been name "Sim City Online". As it is, people had to assume it would be somewhat like the other Sim Cities, a single player game. Which it isn't. It's simply deception and fraud.

    Deception and fraud...based off the title alone? Nobody likes DRM...but lets not get all batshit crazy and imply that all the warnings in every aricle, all the descriptions on any retailer's advratisieng, all over the the games box cover etc, did not give ample warning about being always online.

    Imagine tomorrow you buy a car, say a GM. And in one year, GM goes bankrupt, and because of that you can never drive your car anymore because it's function is online bound to the GM servers. I suppose you would by all right be pissed. People buy SimCity because of the NAME, because of the HISTORY. They assume a game of the same name is the same. That's why Ultima Online was named "ONLINE" and not just "Ultima", so to assure you don't deceive fans of the single player series. It's deception and I am damn sure they knew a lot would but SimCity because of the predecessors and not read some small printed stuff on the backside of the box.

    Proof: apparently the masses of customers were surprised and outraged and returned the game, because of the fraud implied in the title. Otherwise we would not HAVE the shitstorm we witness.

    So I am taking Blizzard to court now because World Of Warcraft does not have online in the title and it requires and always on connection.

    One of the requirements to run Sim City is an always on Internet connection, if you can't supply this then you do not meet the minimum requirements to run the game and should not buy it.

    I was annoyed when other games I used to play got shut down, but these things happen, it's in the terms an conditions you agree to when you play the game.

    Feeling well siding with the fraudulence rich company?

    There is jurisdictional fraud and there is moral fraud. Not all that the law allows is morally right. And your example is the worst possible. After 3 single player games named "Warcraft", Blizzard did NOT name their Online Game "Warcraft" but "WORLD of Warcraft", thus signifying "this is different", "this is NOT like the Warcraft single player games"!

    EA named their Online Game the same as the four single player games, thus misleading players to believe it would be like the previous games. I don't know about customer protection in America, but here in the EU we are very stern with such matters. The customer laws are much strikter here, thank goodness. German courts have repeatadly judged that just small notes on the backside are not enough. I am no lawyer, so my opinion is just that - opinion. But if were a judge I would clearly call it fraud and customer deception.

     

    Let me quote, from the bottom of my heart aggreeing, from RockPaperShotgun:

    "What EA and Maxis have done with SimCity is attempt a year-long PR assault to suggest that the online-only nature of SimCity is designed to offer enhancements for gamers. This is simply not true. It’s utter rubbish. It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two. The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact.

    To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It’s a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher’s burrowing.

    ... Always-on DRM is a disease that we cannot allow ourselves to be so willingly infected by. It’s a curse on gaming. It’s diminishing our experiences, reducing the possibilities for our play, and creating a space where faulty games are accepted as complete. Always-on DRM is a broken game. They need to be fixed."

    Source: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/11/simcity-is-inherently-broken-lets-not-let-this-go/

    THIS a 1000 times.

    Yet....there was no huge outrage from Final Fantasy XI...and that had a whopping TEN single player prequals...

    I don't think anyone is arguring that DRM isn't shit, so you can stop posting links attesting to that....but you have to drop the arguemtn that since the game did not have "online" in its title, its "fraud"

    yes because FF 11 is a single player game who need to you be online all the time, also DID you read teh logo of FF11? it have the damn ONLINE THERE right fellow the name, also note the game was always noted as a MMORPG nothing more or less. bring a better example next time, and read the link the dude here provide, see if you can open your mind a little

    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
    image

  • birdycephonbirdycephon Salt Lake City, UTPosts: 1,314Member
    Originally posted by alkarionlog

    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by SlickShoes
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by doodphace
    Originally posted by Elikal
    It's a fraud. Sim City 5 is an Online game and should have been name "Sim City Online". As it is, people had to assume it would be somewhat like the other Sim Cities, a single player game. Which it isn't. It's simply deception and fraud.

    Deception and fraud...based off the title alone? Nobody likes DRM...but lets not get all batshit crazy and imply that all the warnings in every aricle, all the descriptions on any retailer's advratisieng, all over the the games box cover etc, did not give ample warning about being always online.

    Imagine tomorrow you buy a car, say a GM. And in one year, GM goes bankrupt, and because of that you can never drive your car anymore because it's function is online bound to the GM servers. I suppose you would by all right be pissed. People buy SimCity because of the NAME, because of the HISTORY. They assume a game of the same name is the same. That's why Ultima Online was named "ONLINE" and not just "Ultima", so to assure you don't deceive fans of the single player series. It's deception and I am damn sure they knew a lot would but SimCity because of the predecessors and not read some small printed stuff on the backside of the box.

    Proof: apparently the masses of customers were surprised and outraged and returned the game, because of the fraud implied in the title. Otherwise we would not HAVE the shitstorm we witness.

    So I am taking Blizzard to court now because World Of Warcraft does not have online in the title and it requires and always on connection.

    One of the requirements to run Sim City is an always on Internet connection, if you can't supply this then you do not meet the minimum requirements to run the game and should not buy it.

    I was annoyed when other games I used to play got shut down, but these things happen, it's in the terms an conditions you agree to when you play the game.

    Feeling well siding with the fraudulence rich company?

    There is jurisdictional fraud and there is moral fraud. Not all that the law allows is morally right. And your example is the worst possible. After 3 single player games named "Warcraft", Blizzard did NOT name their Online Game "Warcraft" but "WORLD of Warcraft", thus signifying "this is different", "this is NOT like the Warcraft single player games"!

    EA named their Online Game the same as the four single player games, thus misleading players to believe it would be like the previous games. I don't know about customer protection in America, but here in the EU we are very stern with such matters. The customer laws are much strikter here, thank goodness. German courts have repeatadly judged that just small notes on the backside are not enough. I am no lawyer, so my opinion is just that - opinion. But if were a judge I would clearly call it fraud and customer deception.

     

    Let me quote, from the bottom of my heart aggreeing, from RockPaperShotgun:

    "What EA and Maxis have done with SimCity is attempt a year-long PR assault to suggest that the online-only nature of SimCity is designed to offer enhancements for gamers. This is simply not true. It’s utter rubbish. It’s a backward step for a format that seemed to be managing for years to offer single player and multiplayer options for games without the universe cracking in two. The idea that multiplayer-only is an enhancement is such an obvious piece of newspeak, such a ridiculous untruth, that we can only loudly and furiously react against it if we’re to not see it incredulously accepted as fact.

    To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It’s a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher’s burrowing.

    ... Always-on DRM is a disease that we cannot allow ourselves to be so willingly infected by. It’s a curse on gaming. It’s diminishing our experiences, reducing the possibilities for our play, and creating a space where faulty games are accepted as complete. Always-on DRM is a broken game. They need to be fixed."

    Source: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/03/11/simcity-is-inherently-broken-lets-not-let-this-go/

    THIS a 1000 times.

    Yet....there was no huge outrage from Final Fantasy XI...and that had a whopping TEN single player prequals...

    I don't think anyone is arguring that DRM isn't shit, so you can stop posting links attesting to that....but you have to drop the arguemtn that since the game did not have "online" in its title, its "fraud"

    yes because FF 11 is a single player game who need to you be online all the time, also DID you read teh logo of FF11? it have the damn ONLINE THERE right fellow the name, also note the game was always noted as a MMORPG nothing more or less. bring a better example next time, and read the link the dude here provide, see if you can open your mind a little

    Lol wut? You must not have played it pre-CoP 

  • ElikalElikal ValhallaPosts: 7,904Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Paradigm68

    This is a tweet from SimCity: "We have no intention of offlining SimCity any time soon but we'll look into that as part of our earning back your trust efforts."

    So yes that sounds likr it is possible. Probably around when the revenue stream from the online community dries up, they'll relase a standalonge patch/client to wring out some more earnings.

    We look into it, PR bla bla for: We have your money, kthxbye.

    People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert

  • XirikXirik Yorkton, SKPosts: 1,699Member
    Originally posted by Elikal
    It's a fraud. Sim City 5 is an Online game and should have been name "Sim City Online". As it is, people had to assume it would be somewhat like the other Sim Cities, a single player game. Which it isn't. It's simply deception and fraud.

    wtf are you talking about? We have known that Sim City 5 was going to be online and be multiplayer focus for over a year. 

    Learn the definition of fraud before you go raving like a lunatic.

    No wonder parents complain that there kids are playing violent games which they bought and would have known about if they simply looked it up online or looked at the back of the box.

     

    "You have some serious mental issues you may need to seek some help for. There are others who post things, but do not post them in the way you do. Out of every person who posts crazy shit in this forum, you have some of the craziest and scariest" -FarReach

  • Paradigm68Paradigm68 New York, NYPosts: 884Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Elikal
    Originally posted by Paradigm68

    This is a tweet from SimCity: "We have no intention of offlining SimCity any time soon but we'll look into that as part of our earning back your trust efforts."

    So yes that sounds likr it is possible. Probably around when the revenue stream from the online community dries up, they'll relase a standalonge patch/client to wring out some more earnings.

    We look into it, PR bla bla for: We have your money, kthxbye.

    Oddly enough, I wish it were 'we have your money, kthxbye' that would be the offline people are asking for. Problem is it's we have your money, now we're going to force you to stick around so we can nickle/dime you.

  • SlickShoesSlickShoes EdinburghPosts: 1,037Member Uncommon

    Elikal, you are bananas!

    I am not siding with the enemy here, if you buy a product without reading the system requirements or anything about it then you are responsible for that.

    There are lots of online games that don't have online in the title. PS3 game SOCOM Confrontation was a sequel of the PS2 Series SOCOM which had a great single player component, SOCOM Confrontation was an online only game. I suppose they were trying to dupe the consumers in to buying the game too?

    Of course EA/Maxis are milking that Sim City name, it's called marketing.

    Now if you want to complain about how terrible the Sim City servers are, how your city saves are being corrupted and how always on DRM is guff then I will get behind you, but while you are making out that developers are trying to con you in to a game by not putting ONLINE in the title, I will leave you to that on your own.

    image
2»
Sign In or Register to comment.