SimCity. Always on DRM example of failure.

It's ridiculous. I am at a loss for words on how a company such as EA can have such an inadequate comprehension of their own product's requirements and popularity.

 

The irony of DRM is that you force all good paying customers to suffer for the sins of the pirates.

And the pirates themselves are just a few guys, the vast majority are just dimwit leechers have you seen the comments on torrent sites? "can't run the game I can't copy the exe to the dvd!" I mean seriously, 99% of these people are fucking retards, they can barely figure how to install a pirated game.

If the uploader leaves thats it, is not like those idiots are going to figure it out themselves.

 

I acrually glad that they make such insanely stupid DRM - they will dig their own graves faster. And that's great. Companies like EA must die. All can do is sell you shareware game for 60+ and then bam... you need to buy a DLC to get a full game, another 30+ or more. Grrreat...
Look at current big kickstarter campaigns - great games and most of them (90%) are multi-platform and DRM-free. And you can't milk customers with day one DLC or Disc Locked Content. You can't feed another lame game with the name of some great series of the past. You need to show something promising to get your project funded.

 

Yeah, and one day they'll actually get released too...most of the big projects have been delayed to hell and back so far; either their release schedules were overly optimistic or this whole Kickstarter thing isn't the nirvana many people thought it was. Ironically, considering you mentioned the names of great series from the past, just look at the people who got a ton of money with their Kickstarters and how they're mostly riding on either past merits or a name of a great game from the past: Tim Schafer, Wasteland, Planescape Torment, Carmageddon, Space Quest, Tex Murphy, Elite...

 

Now that people are able to login and play they are testing the always online requirement. Maxis states that all the computation of the game is done on their servers. Well when people switch off their internet the city keeps growing and thriving. Eventually they will get a server lost message but all the computation is being done locally on your pc. Maxis essentially lied that the game must be online to work or their representatives to the press were badly misinformed.

 

Let's not forget they can shut down the server without offering a patch in the future to disable DRM and make it playable offline. There goes your $157 worth of upgrade and addons on top of a $60 software.

 

Kickstarter might not be the fertile crescent that provides a new crop of gaming alternatives as a looming new gaming market, but new burgeoning developers do have a chance to squeeze into a market which is beginning to open up. Today, mega developer houses such as EA and others are continuing the fight to keep their profit line in place and supporting an over bloated internal infrastructure which was relevant before the recession hit. A few good games hitting market from smaller new developers could send them sailing to the forefront, allowing fresh blood to take the limelight . Ultimately, brand loyalty has only so much currency when the product being delivered is insincere and desperate, seeking safe profits over the innovation that gamers crave. Remember, a majority of these bloated big league developer houses got their status through creating a successful franchise. What we are witnessing are big developers, creatively barren, trying to milk their franchises to stay on top. We are now waiting for the new champions to enter the arena and send these over the hill, bankrupt, profit crazed developers to the bright place in the sky.

 

You forgot the part where they send a you bill for the missile.

That's a really disturbing tangent.

Same could be said about 90% of pre-PSX games too. Just sayin'

Call me crazy, but I liked NFS Shift, it bridged the gap between the Gran Turismo (EVERYTHING MUST BE CUSTOMIZED/TUNED TO 100% EFFICIENCY FOR YOU TO NOT SUCK) and the more arcade style racers. I always thought too much customization and tuning was daunting, which is why I haven't liked any of the GT games I've played.

And don't forget this is EA, so the severs will be shut down in 2 years.

 

Have to say "indie" developers are, for the most part, more unoriginal than any big publisher could ever be. So many shitty fucking platformers/twin-stick shooters/tower defense games with fake 8-bit graphics or zombies.

 

I would argue that the big publishers became big precisely because they were original and at some point, they were small and "indie". Sure, there will be independent developers who make bad games and the markets will judge them based on their efforts.

The issue with small publishers creating game content that can match big developer houses is the level of technology involved and the amount of investment capital needed to make a next gen game. With many titles mirroring hollywood big budget films regarding development cost, the issue of up and coming stars becomes distant.

Ideally, there would be an umbrella publisher sharing next gen game development assets to different creative groups giving the potential for more creative content hitting the markets, keeping the industry fresh while profit could still be maintained in house while allowing new blood to emerge.

A model like this, allowing up and comers into the mix at the fraction of traditional costs, via in house tools to encourage innovation. These game titles could be screened and vetted before hitting market. Right now the "indie" market suffers from lack of quality control. Once the market tightens up and standards begin to evolve, the outcome could be surprising within that niche.

I don't think there needs to be a secondary market to usurp the first, I think that creative business practices need to be applied to big publishers with the assets to create superior models for innovation.


Edit: In the movie industry, many large companies not only fund the mainstream block busters but they also support independent film as a means to keep the creativity connected in the mainline industry. Art films, up and coming directors and innovative films are constantly picked up by these companies looking at them as industry investments.

Why couldn't the gaming industry do this as well. Perhaps they do and I am outdated, but rather than developers becoming monolithic one or two franchise creatures, wouldn't it be better to have a bonafied independent section in the main gaming market, supported by the big league, allowing creativity and innovation to circulate.

Edit2: I understand that there are small gaming publishers being supported through the console online markets, but I am discussing giving more room for the big title developments with contemporary technology.

 

Anyone up for a game of BINGO?

 

Just got around to buying SimCity Societies. Found for said $2.00 USD locally

Glad I didn't jump on the New SimCity!!

 

Sega utilized innovation well through first party funding, in fact my argument above was basically reinventing Sega's wheel as they had a very good publisher system in place, only it's not a trend embraced industry wide. Pre-Sammy Sega brought many innovative titles to market. Some would argue that this risky system cost Sega while play it safe publishers can count their years ahead.

Perhaps the "indie" market is a microcosm of the larger gaming industry. Both seem to be saturated with the same proven formulas and strangled to death. The visual "Bingo" argument above shows that the gaming industry isn't fluid enough, even in the "indie" market. The "indie" market which touted itself as being fresh, has now gotten stale. Their schtick is dying or soon to be dead.

Thinking this over, I am not arguing for the "indie" market which is attempting to grow it's own market brand, arts and craft alternative using innovation as a series of ploys. I am thinking about wholesale gaming and the directions available in the larger consumer market place.. With big publishers taking safe avenues, which are alienating gamers, as we can see with Dead Space 3 and other sh*t releases, there must be a way for risk to reapply itself to the gaming landscape without being monopolized and the painting into the corner pattern reemerging.

All of this will come to a breaking point if there isn't a reinvention of the core philosophy about what should be at the forefront of gaming industry principles, not merely out of survival, but also what constitutes better business. Not innovation for innovation's sake, but ground continuing to be broken at a healthy pace within the industry. New ideas, not wacky art projects , but fundamentally different ideas being injected into the market. This isn't new and happens continually. What isn't happening is a pace in which evolution is taking place keeping the market healthy and fluid.

Desperation leads to conservatism which ultimately leads to death, or if you will, a gaming market crash. The large amounts of secondary developers and publishers who push out sh*t copycat titles to cash in aren't in this equation. This secondaries only give the false picture that the market is rich with choice. It's again the large developers sitting on their past successes wilting under economic pressure. Perfect time for a new model to be introduced. Otherwise, we will see a conservative DRM riddled game industry, killing of the secondary used market and applying strict controls to ensure profit. This will lead to the industry buckling down with an increasingly limited demographic and subsequently becoming niche. Anyhow if this happens, others will step in to fill the gaping hole left behind by this tightening.

I don't see developers and publishers taking the industry towards a more open model with risk taking injections. Finally, why take risk? Because the industry is showing signs of decadence. It may not be innovation through games themselves but perhaps in the business model. Whatever is happening, the present trajectory appears to be heading towards crash.

 

100% unrelated beside the name. wouldn't have bought it even for 2$.. this one looked good but seems they f*ed it up

 

Actually it is related. Except for Maxis name not being on it. Liked it better then SimCity 3 and 4

 

Phil Fish is the absolute worst for this. Fez is a horrible game and he himself is pretty deplorable.

Still think Pixel is the man when its comes to indie development.

 

I have no idea who Pixel is, and googling doesn't really give you any good results, considering these indie people all have a hard-on for fake 8-bit graphics and therefore have to have the word "pixel" in the names of their "studios". Also, I wish there was a correlation between horrible people making horrible games, but unfortunately those things are pretty much unrelated to each other.

 

Im sure EA a forcing people to pirate games just to be able to play them, why is an internet connection even required on a single player game, that's nuts.