thethird0611 said:
I just have to say Kreen, with all these EA threads popping up, I love seeing your responses. Always level headed and unbiased. I really need to keep them bookmarked, because I wanted to quote one earlier XD
Thanks. I try my best to demystify the dev process, but it only works if the person has an open ear towards wanting to understand it. Some just want to hear confirmation of their bias and reacting negatively if it's not what they think (which is often the case). I do what I can to give a balanced view and offer a big picture perspective, as a lot of people don't see the interconnected relationships for the game industry.
I mean, I too was quite surprised even when I went from gamer to modder, let alone becoming a professional. The choices one has to make even on a small scale mod for gameplay, as well as working on a team, each of our own preferences, work and play styles. I'm still proud of the work I did on WyvernCrown of Cormyr for NWN - you know, Premium Modules, a precursor to DLC! People kept clamoring for horses in NWN, spent the better part of a YEAR making a 3hr module and adding horses to it. And oh boy, had we known, we would have NOT bothered with it, it didn't really add much to the game and now we understood why it was never added in.
Now think about features when you have $20,000,000.00 on the budget, a deadline, and just spend half a year realizing something didn't work out.
And realize all those "great ideas" people toss out on forums and such, might have already been tested out - and it wasn't that fun in practice. Theorizing in a vacuum is all fine and dandy when you're not actually offering anything more than time to type it out, but reality is when you actually implement it in context with all the other game systems, or let it loose on the player population who will seek to exploit and beat it. You know, "no plan survives contact with the enemy" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_von_Moltke_the_Elder#Moltke.27s_Theory_of_War].
thethird0611 said:
Also, I agree with Kreen, most of the time people who vilify EA usually use bad facts. So many people still believe the servers are EA's fault, when Maxis is pulling all the blame for it. Also, the point of everyone trying to make 'Always Online' and 'Always Online DRM' the same thing. SimCity was built for online play, meaning its not DRM. Thats like saying WoW is only server based because its DRM. To anyone who thinks it is EA who made it always online, we -dont- know.
Yes, it's not like Assassin's Creed 2's DRM on the PC which all it does is phone home and cloud saves for a single-player game with no online component. SC has the region play, and like it or not, the game is designed with BOTH city and region play in mind. It's like playing Counter-Strike or TF2 but only ever playing offline, solo vs. bots. You're kind of missing the point. They focus on just the tree stump (DRM) and miss the forest (the other aspects offered with online).
And look at another perspective, Valve's DRM is non-intrusive right? But yet the TF2 item server requires you to be online to benefit. If you're in a tournament, like at a LAN party and there's no Internet connection (like @ PAX Prime 2010), you've just been nerfed if you relied on a particular weapon beyond the stock ones. Oops.
Not saying only offering one play mode would be something I would have done, though. I would have had SC offer solo, offline play in the guise of pick a city plot and play only on that, with no regions. And at least up the city plot size as well. And named and promoted it differently.
Ah, promoting it. I think that's the real problem with the whole snafu - a lot of PR people making exaggerated claims and the company trying to save face by not admitting to it, due to image. I think game companies need to get rid of that attitude, and not spend as much on their PR department as it seems many of them don't have a clue. Having a beta stress test, then limiting how many go on to garner a favourable environment for the press reviews? How about keeping it as an actual test and not letting PR have a say?
Maeshone said:
He's not really saying that though, it's quite ovious he's just using an analogy to explain the psychology behind why microtransactions are successful. And he's got a point. If you were to end up in that situation, lots of people would react exactly the way he's saying.
This so much. It irks me whenever I see someone link to that video claiming the whole "charging for bullets" line. Or any reference to other articles, then they have the nerve to accuse me of not understanding the thing in question, but when I ask what their interpretation is, I get no response back. Wat? Which makes me wonder what ELSE they've miscomprehended when it comes to, well, anything. Like they're basically looking or listening for keywords and ignoring the context as a whole.
I doubt I'd convince them, I just don't want others to get suckered into their distorted view of reality.
Like, for all the doom predictions, people keep saying Maxis will get shut down Real Soon Now, and they've been saying that for the past ... how many years now? 16?