EA Offers Free Game to Early SimCity Adopters
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Allow me to quote you from the top six comments when I click over to the metacritic user reviews.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
I'll stop there. They go on in much the same manner. Angry customers unhappy with a shoddy products, venting their opinion in the only place there they think it has some way to count for something. I'm not seeing many 'irrational' loonies here. Or maybe it's just easier for you to paint them with a wide brush to make yourself feel better about it.
And if you check the scores these people gave the game they're all 0's to 3's. I seriously doubt the game is that bad that it deserves a 1.6 overall score. Like I said, it's where all the butthurt fans go to review bomb the game. The scores these people have given the game have just confirmed what I said about metacritic user reviews. So yeah, as I said earlier, the opinion of disappointed fans count when they're being rational about it.itsthesheppy said:
So... just stick your fingers in your ears and repeat yourself in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary? I must be on the internet!Kungfu_Teddybear said:
Yes, thank you for providing me more evidence that user reviews on Metacritic are no more than irrational review bombings from butthurt customers. Because I'm sure this game deserved over 2000 negative reviews with scores of 0's to 3's. I have nothing more to say on it, you can pay attention to the Metacritic user reviews if you wish, see if I care.itsthesheppy said:
While I agree that MetaCritic in general and it's user review in particular are pretty useless, when you've attracted so many negative reviews in such a short period of time, you must be doing something wrong. In this case making online play a requirement, not a desirable option and then underestimating the demand it would place on your servers.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
If the game flat-out fails to function for most people, it deserves nothing more than a zero.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
Doesn't matter if your game is the second coming of Christ, if people can't play it warrants nothing more than a big fat zero.
Online DRM's and server issues still aren't a reason to give a game a score of 0. Yes, online DRM's suck (well actually, I'm indifferent towards them. But I understand why people hate them), and obviously people are going to get pissed off about server issues. But rushing to metacritic to review bomb it with 0's is unfair. If someone went on and say, gave it a 5 out of 10, and then said something like "The game itself is pretty fun, but it's been simplified quite a bit from the old games. Also the always online requirement and the server issues ruin the experience" or something, then that's an acceptable reason for dislike with a fair score. It's the same with Mass Effect 3 which is sitting at a 4.6 user review score with over 2000 negative reviews, a lot of them complaining about the ending. They seem to ignore the fact that the rest of the game was brilliant.Andrew_C said:
DmC Devil May Cry, another game to be review bombed recently, a lot of people complaining about the new design on the characters. I'll be the first to admit that when DmC was released I hated what Ninja Theory did to the characters, and I still do. But I gave the game a chance, and when I played it I was pleasantly surprised. The gameplay was fun, the platforming was fun, the level design was great, the soundtrack was great. Overall it was a great addition to the series, but because of the character design the game got a bunch of 0's on metacritic.
One bad feature/part of a game does not warrant a 0 out of 10 review and an overall score of 1.something.
No it doesn't. Hey, I have an idea! Let's go and give almost every MMO ever a 0 out of 10 because they had server issues at launch.GamingAwesome1 said:
Server issues can be fixed, and when they are, all the whiners will play the game and love it.
I don't recall most MMO's completely failing to work for most people at launch. Anyway, an MMO is by and large a different beast altogether, they must be constantly online by their very nature. This game's always online is by and large arbitrary and unnecessary.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
The fact that even if a game just doesn't work and the company's stated they have no intention of fixing the root of the problem, the arbitrary always online DRM, you'd still think it's deserving of more than a zero sounds like utter lunacy to me.
I don't agree with review bombing, but when that "One bad feature" prevents you from playing the game as designed (EA turning off features to lighten server load), and sometimes from even playing it at all, then yes it deserves to be harshly criticised.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
I wouldn't even give Too Human, my most hated game of all time, a 0 out of 10. Diablo III, a game with forced online DRM that had server issues at launch. I was one of the people that suffered from the server issues, it took me about 3 hours to finally get logged in, yeah it was annoying, but I didn't rush off to metacritic to review bomb it in a biased rage. I waited until the issues were fixed, when they were I played it and enjoyed it.GamingAwesome1 said:
But it shouldn't have to be fixed. I expect a working game when I buy it. Simcity (5) Is not an MMO. Holding it to the standards of an MMO is not right. It is an online game, Yes, But Online Game =/= MMO. And Frankly trying to justify that they can do this, is downright sad.Kungfu_Teddybear said:
What next? Are they going to make RPGs always online? Where the biggest influence other players have on your game is a passing "Oh this hero did x" and justify that as a reason to have it always online? If we let EA or any other corporation do this how much tacked on crud will we see in games. How many companies will destroy good video games to try to stop piracy.
The only way to prevent it is to make them understand that they can't do it. If that means bombing the game into dirt. Then so be it. Maybe they will actually learn then.
If you ever thought a game had a tacked on multiplayer. This is the new tacked on multiplayer. They aren't adding things to try to keep you playing it longer. They are making you play it how they want you to. You like mods? GOODBYE. No more mods. Ever. You want innovation? Goodbye. You like being able to do things when you want to? Nuh-uh.
Not as harshly as it is being criticised. Do the customers have the right to complain about the server issues? Definitely. But the way things are going just now is going overboard.Andrew_C said:
Unfortunately this is the direction the industry is taking. I, personally, am indifferent towards online DRM's. I'd rather they weren't there, but at the same time they don't really bother me. The thing is, nothing is going to change because of the whining about it, because that's all it is: whining. People complain about it then buy it anyway, that's why publishers know they can get away with it.Cecilo said:
At the same however you could argue that the intense outcry is discouraging other POTENTIAL Buyers. People that don't want to spend 60 dollars on something that doesn't work.
Granted it is a little bit of.. uh.. speculation? ..Might be something else. Uh.. Implying? I dunno. But anyway, Hopefully those people that are complaining now won't be fooled in the future. Along with the people who are sick of it, and those who are discouraged and don't buy it. We can stop it eventually. Clearly the outcry impacted EA in SOME Way. Otherwise they would do their normal song and dance. Instead of the repeated responses. Comments. And even having Maxis take all the blame.
All I am saying is we shouldn't lie down and take it. And for the record. I have not bought Simcity (5). Or Diablo 3.
On the same side however. Maybe you are right. They don't deserve a 0 (1.5?) For simply having always online DRM. The game I have heard. Works well (If you can get in to actually play it). And is quite enjoyable.
A game I love Sword of the Stars 2: Lords of Winter. Had a HORRIBLE. HORRIBLE Launch. It barely worked. Crashes to Desktop. Visual issues. Lag. Missing Graphics. Just in general horrible horrible launch and it did not get a 0 or even 1.5. I think it had a 3 or 4. Maybe 4.5? Simcity (5) Does not deserve a 0 for simply being always online. I will agree with you there.
Granted it is a little bit of.. uh.. speculation? ..Might be something else. Uh.. Implying? I dunno. But anyway, Hopefully those people that are complaining now won't be fooled in the future. Along with the people who are sick of it, and those who are discouraged and don't buy it. We can stop it eventually. Clearly the outcry impacted EA in SOME Way. Otherwise they would do their normal song and dance. Instead of the repeated responses. Comments. And even having Maxis take all the blame.
All I am saying is we shouldn't lie down and take it. And for the record. I have not bought Simcity (5). Or Diablo 3.
On the same side however. Maybe you are right. They don't deserve a 0 (1.5?) For simply having always online DRM. The game I have heard. Works well (If you can get in to actually play it). And is quite enjoyable.
A game I love Sword of the Stars 2: Lords of Winter. Had a HORRIBLE. HORRIBLE Launch. It barely worked. Crashes to Desktop. Visual issues. Lag. Missing Graphics. Just in general horrible horrible launch and it did not get a 0 or even 1.5. I think it had a 3 or 4. Maybe 4.5? Simcity (5) Does not deserve a 0 for simply being always online. I will agree with you there.
Go and read the reviews. They are almost 100% people complaining about the fact that the DRM is keeping them from playing the game, that they're losing saved cities, and that the game is otherwise nearly unplayable.Ickorus said:
It's the experience of these customers that is contributing to the 'terrible launch' you're witnessing.
Metacritic is a shit outlet for professional reviews, but the user reviews are, to me, more valuable. Regular people, speaking their mind.
The amount of mental gymnastics people are taking re: metacritic user reviews is astounding. "They rated the game (they couldn't even play) a 0! That's irrational!" ... "Aww, those don't count, because there's a lot of them!"
There are something like 2k negative user reviews right now. I imagine there are, worldwide, a little more than 2k unhappy customers, and metacritic is one of the ways they can complain where the company might take notice. Is that so hard to believe?
