Let me throw another analogy out there. YOu buy a car. Every time you try to start the car, it has to communicate wirelessly with the manufacturer's system to confirm the proper key and owner is sitting in the car before it will start. If it can't communicate with the manufacturer, it won't start. But wait if you do get it to start and you are on the road and the car loses the connection with the manufacturer, the car engine will turn off and you are stuck in the middle of the road. Sound crazy right? Would drive any car owner mad. But according to McGee any angry car owner should just relax then and not scream about it.
American McGee Wants Upset SimCity Gamers to "Relax"
- Thread starter Timothy Chang
- Start date
Oh, I get it. And McGee may actually be sincere, rather than trying to get in the good graces of his former publisher as he struggles to negotiate a third Alice game into being around said publisher.
But as long as we're slinging bad metaphors around, just because you didn't intend for your company's blender to malfunction and take off three of my fingers doesn't mean I say "Oh, well, that's all right then, so long as you didn't mean for it to do that." Your good intentions somehow didn't translate to adequate safety testing, so don't give me your piss-poor "sorry".
Likewise, EA must have had some perfectly decent numbers on which to estimate the kind of server load they should expect- not least because wherever people bought their copy of SimCity, at some point they had to go through the damnable Origin system to make it functional. That they didn't have that server capacity available, that they chose to force the small city size and multiplayer aspects on people who didn't want them because that's the market model they're pursuing, that the game has major glitches in baseline gameplay- none of these were unavoidable. None of these were an "oops, we couldn't have known that was going to happen." They could have, or at the very least they could have made some less wildly optimistic estimations about how things were going to go down. Instead, they either made those wildly optimistic projections or judged that the cost of fixing things post-launch was less than the cost of delaying and/or providing a server load they might have to downscale later.
Don't throw your cheese fries at the waiter when your margarita is frozen. But when you order cheese fries and a margarita and three hours later you're given a raw potato and a shot of lime juice, tell the manager you're not giving them any more business if they can't be bothered to do any better.
But as long as we're slinging bad metaphors around, just because you didn't intend for your company's blender to malfunction and take off three of my fingers doesn't mean I say "Oh, well, that's all right then, so long as you didn't mean for it to do that." Your good intentions somehow didn't translate to adequate safety testing, so don't give me your piss-poor "sorry".
Likewise, EA must have had some perfectly decent numbers on which to estimate the kind of server load they should expect- not least because wherever people bought their copy of SimCity, at some point they had to go through the damnable Origin system to make it functional. That they didn't have that server capacity available, that they chose to force the small city size and multiplayer aspects on people who didn't want them because that's the market model they're pursuing, that the game has major glitches in baseline gameplay- none of these were unavoidable. None of these were an "oops, we couldn't have known that was going to happen." They could have, or at the very least they could have made some less wildly optimistic estimations about how things were going to go down. Instead, they either made those wildly optimistic projections or judged that the cost of fixing things post-launch was less than the cost of delaying and/or providing a server load they might have to downscale later.
Don't throw your cheese fries at the waiter when your margarita is frozen. But when you order cheese fries and a margarita and three hours later you're given a raw potato and a shot of lime juice, tell the manager you're not giving them any more business if they can't be bothered to do any better.
The Sims City situation was really more like having to pay to get into a restaurant then not being served, with the waitress making excuses that it's a legal requirement for you to wait 4 hours before being served and then finding out that this was a lie. That is something rageworthy.
This isn't like a margarita being prepared wrong. This is like if you walked into a restraunt, payed, and recieved an empty plate that maybe food would appear on after a few days or so.
I don't care about it though because it only hurts them really. They can keep up their shitty business practices while more gamers become pirates in response.
I don't care about it though because it only hurts them really. They can keep up their shitty business practices while more gamers become pirates in response.
See, the thing is, at least 75% of PC games are bought digitally. And because Sim City could only be bought through Origin and Diablo III would only be bought through Blizzard, shouldn't both of the companies had an accurate estimate of how many people were going to log in on lauch day? (based on pre-orders) So I don't understand how these companies claim that they didn't expect so many people logging on when they had that info right in front of them. Fact of the matter is, EA and Blizzard were lazy.
days later, somebody figures out how to disable the connection feature among others and all of the people who broke the warranty have actual functioning carsCManator said:
meanwhile, EA sits back, satisfied that their method of trying to prevent piracy has not in fact promoted it far beyond anything else they could have done
This is the second developer who has been an associated of EA to defend EA out of the blue. Two times is a coincidence, this happens the third time, I'm drawing the conspiracy charts.
So instead of defending a dumb business practice he's:
1. Mildly purporting that complaining about SimCity makes you a super mad and irrational person?
2. Saying that there are angry people on the internet who blow things out of proportion who should calm down?
3. Saying there are irrational people who should calm down?
Are any of these important? Do I need to make fun of this:
No. if a company says "hey there might be problems" they do not get protected from criticism. Yes gnashing teeth don't solve the problem, but if no one says anything....nothing will happen.
Back to you MPerce
Let's be clear, there are people who argue calmly and those that argue insanely. There are those who realize their videogames are not the most important things in the world and there are those who believe that taking away their VIDYA is a blight on the modern world.
You're telling both to "calm down." This is the same thing that Penny Arcade did during the Diablo III debacle. It doesn't do anything, it doesn't remove the problem, it makes fun of a strawman for the issue and doesn't offer a solution.
Um...Ok.MPerce said:
So instead of defending a dumb business practice he's:
1. Mildly purporting that complaining about SimCity makes you a super mad and irrational person?
2. Saying that there are angry people on the internet who blow things out of proportion who should calm down?
3. Saying there are irrational people who should calm down?
Are any of these important? Do I need to make fun of this:
Ok fine Mr. McGee, I won't turn it into WWIII, I'll just note how it's a bad direction for the industry....like I've been doing.
"Guys....EA didn't mean it, they were trying our best for a genuine singleplayer experience, so much that they didn't want our computers to do the necessary calculations. Instead of criticizing them, we should let it slide."
No. if a company says "hey there might be problems" they do not get protected from criticism. Yes gnashing teeth don't solve the problem, but if no one says anything....nothing will happen.
If only he could name a case where this: worked, resulted in no piracy, gave benefits to the consumers instead of the pirates, and made the game easier to play. None has been invented yet, but they could try a service that gets close....like Steam perhaps?
Back to you MPerce
Isn't this the starving child in Africa argument? Ok fine, I'll simmer down.MPerce said:
Let's be clear, there are people who argue calmly and those that argue insanely. There are those who realize their videogames are not the most important things in the world and there are those who believe that taking away their VIDYA is a blight on the modern world.
You're telling both to "calm down." This is the same thing that Penny Arcade did during the Diablo III debacle. It doesn't do anything, it doesn't remove the problem, it makes fun of a strawman for the issue and doesn't offer a solution.
Their motivations were never in question, it's whether or not they're getting paid more with draconian DRM schemes.Gethsemani said:
That has yet to be determined. We know it works for MMOs, but not every game follows MMO design logic; most games, by far, are not service-centric.
When Always-Online DRM crosses that line, into games that don't need it, I am hoping that the mass-market rejects it outright. Why? Because Always Online won't just end with stopping piracy; it will be the beginning of a cycle of customer abuse and price hikes.
Pssst... the DRM isn't the thing we're shouting about anymore (at least not primarily)
Once we were able to get INTO the game itself and past the servers... we found a broken and unfinished product that was bad regardless of the DRM used. Get with the times.
Once we were able to get INTO the game itself and past the servers... we found a broken and unfinished product that was bad regardless of the DRM used. Get with the times.
Well he's focusing on the DRM issue regardless of how poor he's painting a picture of the "entitled-never-satisfied" paying consumers who are "unfairly" criticizing EA and Maxis.Pinstar said:
I think the problem is that EA/Maxis were lying to everyones faces to shove their crappy DRM on everyone claiming it was needed for social features that no one wanted. Even if they did, a single player/offline option would have been very easy to do and they instead chose to give pirates the better experience so they could push future DLC for the game.
I do think people who bought Diablo 3 & Sim City get what they deserve though, you bought a game with Always Online DRM, what did you expect? You paid 60 bucks so you could ask a company every time if you have permission to play their game. "No sorry the servers are down" "Game in progress? Oh sorry maintenance in 15 minutes." "Sorry you can't play our game, you're not online."
Don't buy it and play a better game, Sim City 4 anyone?
I do think people who bought Diablo 3 & Sim City get what they deserve though, you bought a game with Always Online DRM, what did you expect? You paid 60 bucks so you could ask a company every time if you have permission to play their game. "No sorry the servers are down" "Game in progress? Oh sorry maintenance in 15 minutes." "Sorry you can't play our game, you're not online."
Don't buy it and play a better game, Sim City 4 anyone?
While Mr McGee seems a bit confused about WHY players are reacting, and seems to be actively trolling the gaming world, this thread alone sure does give him a leg to stand on about HOW players are reacting.
Granted, asking the Internet to respond calmly and maturely to anything is akin to herding kittens during an earthquake.
Granted, asking the Internet to respond calmly and maturely to anything is akin to herding kittens during an earthquake.
You know that's an interesting point.Snotnarok said:
If AM was saying: "Don't complain, you should have expected this." We'd be agreeing with him
Instead he's saying: "Don't complain, EA and Maxis didn't mean for this to happen... so you should put up with their bullshit."