you are assuming 2 things that are incorrect:Yoshi Dragon said:Costia said:You are mixing 2 different issues:Yoshi Dragon said:let me tell you a little story about a game called torchlight 2Costia said:You brought up diablo 3, it's a good example.
After a few days of server troubles it became stable and sold 12 million copies (source: http://diablo.somepage.com/news/1489-activision-blizzard-q4-2012-earnings-report)
I expect the same to happen here. After the rage-storm is over, people will buy it and enjoy it.
And saying that maxis\EA did this on purpose sounds ridiculous to me. Not only they are loosing money, but they are also hurting their brand, which is in trouble as it is. It's Maxis's first "MMO" title, and i don't think that blizzard was willing to share their secrets.
They screwed up. Badly. But saying that they don't care is an exaggeration.
I don't like always online DRM either, but I am not going to make stuff up to justify my opinion.
when it first game out everybody in the world who had prebought it was downloading it all pretty much at the second they could. almost noone could use multiplayer because the servers were jammed and crashed. the company that released it got up early got on their forums said sorry our bad we're fixing it and fixed it within 24 to 48 hours.
if a small company like that can do it then larger companies can do it too. sure downloads i can excuse when everone in the world is trying to download your game at the same time noones gonna get the file very fast. but always online servers... welll you should know a little something about the demand thats gonna be placed on your servers and have as many as needed to carry the capacity from day 1. there is no excuse for not doing that.
1) the time it takes them to fix it: There is a significant difference between Torchlight and Simcity. The amount of players. And I bet the complexity of SimCity is much greater than of Torchlight. I don't think that they are just sitting there taking their time to fix it. It's hard. It will take time. Like I said, they screwed up. And now they are trying to fix it as fast as they can.
2) The necessity of always online DRM: I think they should have separated the DRM from the game, so they could remove it if necessary. But their design was such that the DRM is part of the game. I think it's bad for many reasons. Not being able to play at the first week of launch is not one of them.
Their excuse to putting it there is piracy. And if you look at the bottom lone, at how much money they are going to make, they are probably going to make more with this DRM than what they would have gotten without it, even with all the rage that you see now. So for them it makes a lot of sense to use it.
no it's basically the same issue with a twist.
how long would it really take for them to acquire and put in some new servers. it -shouldnt- take a week. what they ought to do is publicly say oops we're fixing it pull out some of their backup servers hook them up and then order some more servers.
the whole thing from the players point of view would be wrapped up in 72 hours. instead they arent apologizing and instead everyone else is excusing them
Don't blame EA for that. That shit sits right in the lap of the US Supreme Court. Bullshit laws are bullshit, there is no-one who hasn't jumped on that particular bandwagon.dubious_wolf said:So it's mostly EA that puts this shit together.... What are the options for class action suits?
BF3 is still a world class multiplayer team based vehicular shooter. Sure Planetside is challenging it, but Planetside (as much as I do love it) just isn't as fun as BF. It remains to be seen what will happen to BF4. Plus you know FIFA...love it or hate the yearly instalments it is a top notch game and a huge seller in every market outside North America.crimson sickle2 said:Does EA even own anything decent anymore? It depends on taste, but aside from Sims is there anything else? We all know Dead Space is either dead or screwed, so that isn't an option. The few IP they had that showed promise seem to have shriveled after being drained of all creative life-force.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that most, if not all, games get pirated, so it would be weird if they weren't interested in one of the bigger releases.Halyah said:Ah in that sense. I didn't really pay attention to what pirates were doing with Diablo 3 as it didn't really catch me as a game they'd even particularly care about after I finally got to play it during the launch week. I was too busy wondering what the writers were smoking. Whatever it was, it must've been some dang effective stuff given everything came across as if having been written while high on cocaine, LSD, PCP and a bunch of other stuff.Wenseph said:I meant it took more time for the pirates to make a working version, not that it took longer than usual for the game to work in a good way.Halyah said:I think it took around... two to three weeks or so before it was stable enough to say there were relatively few issues, but D3 had a lot of other problems on top of it beyond that due to the RMAH. As it turns out, the entire AH aspects screwed the game over big time as the game was set up with that aspect in mind. Didn't help that drops weren't balanced either. So in theory the game ain't that good yet, it's just that the always online part is not the only big issue with it anymore.Wenseph said:I don't even buy games from EA, and I'm hoping that they will get what they deserve one day soon. They're probably the company that deserves losing customers the most. I liked Sim City 4, but I will never buy this game. Also, the always online does make it harder to pirate. I think it took quite some time before they managed to make a working version of Diablo 3, at least more than it usually takes.
Also on a sidenote: Where is that creepy cat chick from? I swear I've seen it somewhere before.
EDIT: Wow this thread exploded in size faster than I had noticed.
Game mechanically I didn't have many issues beyond drop rates and item quality being crap, forcing me to look at the gold AH for anything decent(but you've probably heard that one a thousand times already, once already from me).
That's not really the opposite of my assumption, my point was exactly that even if you ignore the fan outrage, and even fix every potential technical fiasco so they can comfortably have DRM with no consequences, the concept of locking out pirates is in itself a harmful financial result that they have no reason to feel happy about.poiumty said:I didn't say EA SHOULD be happy about that, I said they have a reason to be, I'm not defending EA's business practices. And how many people will buy the next Sim City? If this online DRM thing gets implemented successfully a few times, people will mellow out. So the answer is a lot of people. Of course that's just my assumption, as the opposite is yours.
It's called negative amortization and private student loan companies still do it sometimes, mine does.cynicalsaint1 said:Jim - you live in a country where until fairly recently it was perfectly kosher for credit card companies to set your minimum monthly payment lower than the amount of interest charged to your account for that month, and you're asking why videogame companies are allowed to pull this kind of BS without being held accountable?
I think Jim has a point though. It's true they're going to get the money but if you wait a bit longer than a few weeks it could be the difference between them getting $39 instead of $59. The way I see it, the most important sale to a publisher at this point isn't the sale at all but the pre-sale which brings me to...Azaraxzealot said:Or you don't have to buy the game at all. If you wait a few weeks and still buy it they'll still get the money and no lesson will have been learned.