Good going shitlords.
Now the same is still going to happen with every game they release, you'll think it's awesome, buy it, think it's crap, say EA is bad and then pick up their shiny new game a month later.
And you know what struck me? The only way to know if a game is good any more is to see if anyone is talking about it, all the media outlets have done for the last few weeks is complain about how crappy EA is, and [I]nothing[/I] changes.
gg
It's one of those rare cases where the game is actually really fun to play but the hate against EA is entirely justified since they more or less boldfaced lied to everyone.
Simcity is a well known franchise and has always been decent, I guess people had more trust this time. When I buy Simcity I think of Maxis and not directly of EA.
[QUOTE=junker|154;39959657]Simcity is a well known franchise and has always been decent, I guess people had more trust this time. When I buy Simcity I think of Maxis and not directly of EA.[/QUOTE]
There is no longer any distinction between a studio owned by EA, and EA itself.
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;39959688]There is no longer any distinction between a studio owned by EA, and EA itself.[/QUOTE]
DICE is pretty far removed from EA corporate from what I hear of the two people I know that work there.
EDIT: So the people rating this post: Are you actually going to reply with feedback or just hide behind ratings because you have nothing to back your conspiracy theories up with?
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;39959635]Good going shitlords.
Now the same is still going to happen with every game they release, you'll think it's awesome, buy it, think it's crap, say EA is bad and then pick up their shiny new game a month later.
And you know what struck me? The only way to know if a game is good any more is to see if anyone is talking about it, all the media outlets have done for the last few weeks is complain about how crappy EA is, and [I]nothing[/I] changes.
gg[/QUOTE]
Uh just because you didn't like the game didn't mean everyone else didn't. I wonder how many people aren't tied up on internet forums crying and whining about all the things they think Sim City should have and are actually enjoying the game and living their life otherwise.
And to them, the sales numbers will justify their fucking retarded DRM, even though it is the root of so many problems.
Fucking business
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39959656]It's one of those rare cases where the game is actually really fun to play but the hate against EA is entirely justified since they more or less boldfaced lied to everyone.[/QUOTE]
How did they lie???
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959718]Uh just because you didn't like the game didn't mean everyone else didn't. I wonder how many people aren't tied up on internet forums crying and whining about all the things they think Sim City should have and are actually enjoying the game and living their life otherwise.[/QUOTE]
You're trying to degrade my side of the argument by insulting me, well done. It doesn't matter if the game is good any more and by all accounts, BF3, DS3 and ME3 were all 'good' games but it doesn't mean EA are any less of shits by trying to hinder the consumer's experience, then try to blame it on the consumer, push the blame onto the devs or even try to flat out deny they did anything wrong. All this negative press rakes in millions and you know what the best thing to do is?
Ignore it.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959730]How did they lie???[/QUOTE]
Saying that the DRM would be very to be removed since it was so connected to the game.
Where have you been the last 2 weeks?
Honestly I don't think I'm [B]ever[/B] going to buy another EA game after this bullshit and I mean it, I don't care how much I want it or how cool it looks, they aren't getting my money anymore. Fuck em to hell, I hope they go bankrupt within this decade.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959730]How did they lie???[/QUOTE]
They said repeatedly that the always-online part of the game was integral to the experience and would be difficult to re-engineer, but a modder did it within a week of release, albeit in a very basic state.
I don't mind their vision for the game being an online pseudo-MMO about regional cooperation, it sounds really neat, but they should have made an offline alternative and their reasons for not doing so are a complete mystery.
That's a lot of free copies of games they have to give out
Haven't purchased an EA game since the original crysis, it's a shame that their business practices suck because the new most wanted for wii u seems interesting
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959730]How did they lie???[/QUOTE]
They lie [I]constantly.[/I]
"Oh, well we can manage such massive regions because a majority of the calculations are done in the ~cloud~"
during beta its learned that hardly anything at ALL is sent to the servers
"The game must be constantly connected because of the calculations that are offloaded there that have already been proven to be bullshit anyway"
people can unplug their computer and get quite a bit of gameplay in before it goes 'HEY, we're not connected anymore! When did that happen? -quit-'
"It would take significant engineering to make SimCity an offline game"
WEEK FUCKING ONE, someone gets a basic offline-only hack going. They're hard at work on cracking saving cities locally, they've already partially defeated the size limits put in place, and running entire regions [I]locally[/I] is well within their grasp. I give it til mid April at the LATEST before thats all functional too.
Nothing but lies, NOTHING but lies. Its all BULLSHIT. ALL OF IT.
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;39959773]You're trying to degrade my side of the argument by insulting me, well done. It doesn't matter if the game is good any more and by all accounts, BF3, DS3 and ME3 were all 'good' games but it doesn't mean EA are any less of shits by trying to hinder the consumer's experience, then try to blame it on the consumer, push the blame onto the devs or even try to flat out deny they did anything wrong. All this negative press rakes in millions and you know what the best thing to do is?
Ignore it.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't insulting you personally, but I was talking about your side of the argument. Trying to hinder the consumers experience? Not sure what you mean. I haven't seen any blame being shifted. I've seen [B]MAXIS[/B] say they were sorry many times, because you know, they made the game and this was their call. You can dwell on your conspiracy theories all you want, but that doesn't make them true.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959896]I wasn't insulting you personally, but I was talking about your side of the argument. Trying to hinder the consumers experience? Not sure what you mean. I haven't seen any blame being shifted. I've seen [B]MAXIS[/B] say they were sorry many times, because you know, they made the game and this was their call. You can dwell on your conspiracy theories all you want, but that doesn't make them true.[/QUOTE]
Saying sorry don't mean shit if you don't mean it, and they obviously don't mean it as much as they want us to think they do.
Sorry for their servers melting on launch? Okay, thats one thing. Apologizing for putting this shit system in place and literally refusing to put anything else into it under the guise that it "doesn't fit with your vision" and now "would be too complicated to do"? They won't do it. They [I]will not[/I] apologize for adding this shit to begin with or how this shit is ruining their game. They're going to stick with it because [I]EA will fuck them up if they don't.[/I]
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959896]I wasn't insulting you personally, but I was talking about your side of the argument. Trying to hinder the consumers experience? Not sure what you mean. I haven't seen any blame being shifted. I've seen [B]MAXIS[/B] say they were sorry many times, because you know, they made the game and this was their call. You can dwell on your conspiracy theories all you want, but that doesn't make them true.[/QUOTE]Wow they said that they were [B]sorry[/B], still doesn't fix all the issues and problems that this game has.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39959854]They lie [I]constantly.[/I][/QUOTE]
Let me break this down for you because you seem to be confused.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39959854]
"Oh, well we can manage such massive regions because a majority of the calculations are done in the ~cloud~"
during beta its learned that hardly anything at ALL is sent to the servers[/QUOTE]
"During Beta". Good representation of the full game. And tell me, how do you think city to city communication is managed in a region? The data from your friends city has to be sent somewhere on the internet so it can then be sent to your city, right? So how do you think that happens? Servers.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39959854]"The game must be constantly connected because of the calculations that are offloaded there that have already been proven to be bullshit anyway"
people can unplug their computer and get quite a bit of gameplay in before it goes 'HEY, we're not connected anymore! When did that happen? -quit-'[/QUOTE]
Uh yeah, if you lose connection you are no longer connected to the global market of the region. This means anyone buying power, sewage space, water, etc will keep buying as usual, as your city will just be treated like you went offline. If you were able to just go offline and keep playing indefinitely, it would cause inconsistencies with the world market when you regained connection. The hacker disabled the offline kick, and thats it. I imagine if everyone were to use the offline kick disabler, it would cause major server issues.
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39959854]"It would take significant engineering to make SimCity an offline game"
WEEK FUCKING ONE, someone gets a basic offline-only hack going. They're hard at work on cracking saving cities locally, they've already partially defeated the size limits put in place, and running entire regions [I]locally[/I] is well within their grasp. I give it til mid April at the LATEST before thats all functional too.[/QUOTE] Like I said, the hacker disabled an offline kick. That's it. He did not crack the game or the system. And I would like evidence of your claim that they are making progress on saving cities locally before I touch that. I don't want to call you a liar but you need to understand that your side of the argument has this terrible habit of oversimplifying everything. A "within our grasp" could actually mean "[I]theoretically[/I] within our grasp".
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39959854]Nothing but lies, NOTHING but lies. Its all BULLSHIT. ALL OF IT.[/QUOTE]
I have seen no lies, just people jumping to conclusions and not thinking things through because they want to believe.
[editline]18th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39960038]Saying sorry don't mean shit if you don't mean it, and they obviously don't mean it as much as they want us to think they do.[/QUOTE]
:tinfoil:
[QUOTE=S31-Syntax;39960038]
Sorry for their servers melting on launch? Okay, thats one thing. Apologizing for putting this shit system in place and literally refusing to put anything else into it under the guise that it "doesn't fit with your vision" and now "would be too complicated to do"? They won't do it. They [I]will not[/I] apologize for adding this shit to begin with or how this shit is ruining their game. They're going to stick with it because [I]EA will fuck them up if they don't.[/I][/QUOTE]
Stop being a selfish asshole wow. [B]THEY ARE THE GAME DEVELOPER[/B]. They don't make your personal fucking games. They say it's their vision because it IS their vision. They are a team of passionate people who want to make video games for people so they can have fun. Just because YOU think the game should have X feature and shouldn't do Y feature doesn't mean they should think the same.
They told you what this game was going to be before you bought it. I know they did because I read the AMA on Reddit and I watched the gameplay videos as well as the interviews.
Stop acting like they owe you a tailor made game. If the game doesn't have the features you want, then guess what, that means you're not really the intended target.
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;39959635]Good going shitlords.
Now the same is still going to happen with every game they release, you'll think it's awesome, buy it, think it's crap, say EA is bad and then pick up their shiny new game a month later.
And you know what struck me? The only way to know if a game is good any more is to see if anyone is talking about it, all the media outlets have done for the last few weeks is complain about how crappy EA is, and [I]nothing[/I] changes.
gg[/QUOTE]
but once everyone bought it and found out it was a piece of shit, nobody could refund it
and some people even bought it twice because they thought their preorder was broken, due to activating AFTER new buys. they couldnt get refunds either.
and this is a problem with preordering.
[quote]Good representation of the full game.[/quote]
It is when the full game appears to have just about as much data being pushed around. Purportedly.
[quote]Uh yeah, if you lose connection you are no longer connected to the global market of the region.[/quote]
Which isn't absolutely necessary to your city's existence, AFAIK. Which means it's not necessary to be constantly connected; in part, because the [i]game itself[/i] realizes that it's not necessary and thus it only syncs ever so often.
[quote]He did not crack the game or the system[/quote]
Let's not get into this again. It is a crack, despite its ease of modding. That EA told people it was a hack should resolve all instances of anyone declaring that this isn't a hack ever; from the frame of reference you're attempting to defend (EA/Maxis), it is a crack; it is being treated as a crack; it does exactly what a crack does by any definition (defeat a protection scheme). That they patched it with a built-in timer that's roped off inside the data of the game is testimony to that effect.
[quote]And I would like evidence of your claim that they are making progress on saving cities locally before I touch that.[/quote]
They know where the temporary data is being saved before being sent to the server. Analyzing the packets being sent shows that most of the data they need to save must be already present. In the modder's own words: It'd only take an hour or so to rig up a UI to save. Now, that's probably optimistic, but that does mean on cursory inspection they've got the bits they need; they just need to figure out how to organize them such that the game will load them and how to dump them to a file. (I'm assuming they must've found some sort of function that packages the data into the format that the server would like from his statements; that is an assumption, again)
I grant you that it's theoretical but it's a theory with a lot of merit; providing you take at face value at least the foundation behind the modder's statements.
That's 1.1 million disappointed people. Good job EA.
[QUOTE=Killer900;39960065]Wow they said that they were [B]sorry[/B], still doesn't fix all the issues and problems that this game has.[/QUOTE]
What would you have them do? Add all the things you ever wanted in a Sim City game to the game itself? Is that the only way to redeem themselves to you? Make your personal dream game that caters to you and your friends and no one else because they don't deserve games made for them.
You have Sim City 2000, Sim City 3000, and Sim City 4. Can you seriously not settle for letting the more casual gamers have a go at the series now? I've showed this game to two casual gamers and they both bought it and love it.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39959730]How did they lie???[/QUOTE]
By saying that parts of the simulation had to be offloaded onto the cloud to justify having to always be connected. And in response to your earlier post in this thread, a lot of people are up in arms over this over more than just not being able to play their newly purchased game for a few days. I don't think EA is some ultimate evil corporate monstrosity, but the way they handled the PR backlash and the response of the consumer to that has revealed some seedy things. When Lucy Bradshaw came out and said that it'd be very hard to make an offline mode due to how the cloud was a huge and integral part that the game literally could not run without, some people weren't complacent and decided to investigate those claims which were in turn found to be complete and utter nonsense. Maxis has realised this and have stopped using that excuse, instead saying that an offline mode doesn't fit with their "vision". That's such an obvious cop-out that anyone who's not a docile fuckwit will realise that that statement is tantamount to going "We don't care if you want to be able to play the game offline, we tried to engineer it so you couldn't."
How can you choose to ignore the truth laid out in front of you? There is a source within Maxis saying their claims are bogus, then a modder removes the offline kick timer and shows that there is no actual technical limitation to justify making your cities incredibly small which is the crux of their claim that it has to be a social experience. You have the facts laid bare and yet for some reason you choose to ignore it in favour of God knows what. It doesn't affect you in any way that EA and Maxis are being called out on their bullshit, so why even bother defending them when the truth is so readily available? Like I said in another thread; By being OK with this you're giving them the go-ahead to implement social experiences into all future games even if those games won't benefit from it and in the end only serves to make it so that you only own the game in so far as that they'll let you.
The truth of the matter is there's absolutely fuck all we can do about it. Maxis can shut down the argument right from the start by saying "No we do not intend to alter the game so it can run offline." The only thing left to do is to make a fuss about it and try to get our opinions heard. But it won't matter for shit if people forgive them too readily because it's just a game.
It's a fun game that had quite a lot of effort put into it, good for them.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]It is when the full game appears to have just about as much data being pushed around. Purportedly.
Which isn't absolutely necessary to your city's existence, AFAIK. Which means it's not necessary to be constantly connected; in part, because the [i]game itself[/i] realizes that it's not necessary and thus it only syncs ever so often.
Let's not get into this again. It is a crack, despite its ease of modding. That EA told people it was a hack should resolve all instances of anyone declaring that this isn't a hack ever; from the frame of reference you're attempting to defend (EA/Maxis), it is a crack; it is being treated as a crack; it does exactly what a crack does by any definition (defeat a protection scheme). That they patched it with a built-in timer that's roped off inside the data of the game is testimony to that effect.
They know where the temporary data is being saved before being sent to the server. Analyzing the packets being sent shows that most of the data they need to save must be already present. In the modder's own words: It'd only take an hour or so to rig up a UI to save. Now, that's probably optimistic, but that does mean on cursory inspection they've got the bits they need; they just need to figure out how to organize them such that the game will load them and how to dump them to a file. (I'm assuming they must've found some sort of function that packages the data into the format that the server would like from his statements; that is an assumption, again)
I grant you that it's theoretical but it's a theory with a lot of merit; providing you take at face value at least the foundation behind the modder's statements.[/QUOTE]
if you read the post you responded to you would have found out that if you're buying or selling resources to other players then you suddenly disappear offline then that creates problems for the people trading resources with you.
If Maxis were to create an offline mode they'd have to do a lot more than just disable the auto-kick.
[quote]If Maxis were to create an offline mode they'd have to do a lot more than just disable the auto-kick.[/quote]
Like not listing the city so that people don't try to trade with it (that is to say that "Offline" cities never get listed and don't get lists of other cities)? That nips the entire bud of the problem you seem to have with it. To me, that seems like very little to change.
[QUOTE=nomad1;39960206]That's 1.1 million disappointed people. Good job EA.[/QUOTE] Not at all, I love the game and will certainly buy upcoming stuff for SC5.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;39960233]What would you have them do? [B]Add all the things you ever wanted in a Sim City game to the game itself? Is that the only way to redeem themselves to you? Make your personal dream game that caters to you and your friends and no one else because they don't deserve games made for them.[/B]
You have Sim City 2000, Sim City 3000, and Sim City 4. Can you seriously not settle for letting the more casual gamers have a go at the series now? I've showed this game to two casual gamers and they both bought it and love it.[/QUOTE]Lol way to go I never said any of that, there a good game underneath all of the crap that's there, I'm just disappointed that the game isn't how I expected it to be watching their videos and livestream pre-launch.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]It is when the full game appears to have just about as much data being pushed around. Purportedly.[/QUOTE]
Then why didn't he just say the full game then. And I would like to see the source of this claim as well.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]
Which isn't absolutely necessary to your city's existence, AFAIK. Which means it's not necessary to be constantly connected; in part, because the [i]game itself[/i] realizes that it's not necessary and thus it only syncs ever so often.[/QUOTE] It syncs every so often as to not overload the servers and the bandwidth, not because it's not important.
And almost everything is communicated between cities in a region. Education, crime, pollution, commuters, visitors, global market, etc. The game is built around these things and the coop region.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]
Let's not get into this again. It is a crack, despite its ease of modding. That EA told people it was a hack should resolve all instances of anyone declaring that this isn't a hack ever; from the frame of reference you're attempting to defend (EA/Maxis), it is a crack; it is being treated as a crack; it does exactly what a crack does by any definition (defeat a protection scheme). That they patched it with a built-in timer that's roped off inside the data of the game is testimony to that effect.[/QUOTE]
I said it was a hack, not a crack, and it's not a crack because it's not defeating any protection scheme because the game still needs to be started while being online.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]
They know where the temporary data is being saved before being sent to the server. Analyzing the packets being sent shows that most of the data they need to save must be already present. In the modder's own words: It'd only take an hour or so to rig up a UI to save. Now, that's probably optimistic, but that does mean on cursory inspection they've got the bits they need; they just need to figure out how to organize them such that the game will load them and how to dump them to a file. (I'm assuming they must've found some sort of function that packages the data into the format that the server would like from his statements; that is an assumption, again)[/QUOTE]
If it would only take an hour, then why haven't they done it yet? Better yet, why hasn't the modder done it? See why I'm extremely skeptical of any of these claims? They sound like people who want to know what they are talking about but when it comes to actually doing the thing they claim, they say "but I don't know how". So how does that make their claim even relevant?
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;39960200]
I grant you that it's theoretical but it's a theory with a lot of merit; providing you take at face value at least the foundation behind the modder's statements.[/QUOTE]
Like I said, if the modder isn't taking himself up on the claim and cracking the game fully and making a local save program, then I can't take him seriously.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
