SimCity modded so it can be played offline indefinitely + editing of highways
- Thread starter nickcv
- Start date
That's not what I'm saying. People can acknowledge the games problems but can still like the game itself and they shouldn't be called a shill for doing so. It's getting annoying.
They talk about it being a live service, but don't really mention it as an evolving product. That blog post seems more in defense of the DRM, especially as it's in response to their disastrous AMA. Compare this to, say, the new Command and Conquer, which is clearly being positioned as an evolving product.
It would make sense if they had planned for SimCity to the base product for a buttload of expansions and DLC (especially given the lack of number in the title), but I haven't seen any direct indication of this being the case.
The Cartographer
Member
Incredible.
*Insert Maxis quote about SimCity simulating individual waves*
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Title is a bit misleading. If I want to save my city I'd have to still be online? Am I reading that right?
Yeah but they usually like to cover games that have lots of killing or sex. That article was about how bad of a launch this game has had.
Well, he'd been assured that it was the case. He didn't imagine that Maxis might be stretching the truth. I've said a few times that I'd like to see the industry press with more of a layer of healthy scepticism. They don't have to be downright hostile to PR, but they could start to probe more carefully. Politely ask the questions they'd rather you didn't.
That said, at the stage he was at at that given moment, all anyone had to go on was Maxis's - or EA PR's - say-so. And that's another interesting thought about this whole mess - this isn't necessarily EA lying, directly. It's concievable that EA specified that Maxis should make a game detailed enough to require a central server, Maxis producing this then assuring EA that the central server is required, and EA failing to fully verify that.
That's not absolving EA of blame in any way, they should have the checks and balances in place to protect against this, but the malice isn't directly on their side. If we see firings or resignations at Maxis, I'll suspect that this outcome is true.
Someone will circumvent that, too. Maybe then people can be swayed to buy it.
Art Teitlebaum
Member
Widespread boycott for their shameless lying is the only possible answer.
But as someone else here said it, these con-artists will sell millions of this crap to the consumers. I cannot eat as much as I want to vomit out.
But as someone else here said it, these con-artists will sell millions of this crap to the consumers. I cannot eat as much as I want to vomit out.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/03/13/simcity-pr-nightmare-escalates/
Looks like the article was actually written for/on an affiliate site, BGR.com.
It really doesn't add up, like you allude to. I posted this in the other thread, but that Maxis design brief PDF that KKRT00 has been banging on about, I read it after dinner and found this gem of a quote at the very end:
from that PDF said:
That PDF pre-dates Lucy's AMA thingo. It's all very sorry from the outside looking in.
PDF link:
www.andrewwillmott.com/talks/inside-glassbox/GlassBox GDC 2012 Slides.pdf
Teletraan1
Banned
When I originally questioned the validity/need for servers to run the calculations in the thread that originally discussed this I was just hit with a bunch of "its like an MMO" nonsense, and slapped in the face with the fact I didnt know as much as a dev does and I never made a game so I could stfu. The group think corporate ball washers are strong on this board.
Majukun
Member
pretty much.
that's also probably why the problem with the servers was so severe..ea knew that the servers don't have to manage much data,so they bought enough server to sustain the game when only the "regular" players will be left.That number of server is severely insufficient for the day one traffic though
grimshawish
Banned
I'm sorry but this 'ugh EA' stuff is bullshit. I know you don't like them but there a massive failings here, they hold responsibility sure but actually understanding these seem more important than 'fuck EA'.
Why has all this happened?
End of the day Maxis was aiming too far at the start, a lack of oversight from EA meant that the actual feasibility of the project, costs and technical needs went untested or investigated. Maxis thought it was just making an ambitious online game, and all games are online right? Neither them or EA successfully identified that games with this level of online and interactivity tend to need a lot of money behind them and this money in the long term comes from subscription, DLC or micro-transaction payments.
Not only that but Maxis failed to actually understand what they were building. I feel, as I did when they announced the game, the interactivity felt bigger in their heads and more feasible. They never thought about how much people would have to play to be interacting in a meaningful way.
Truth is that the social side of this game is a button. Its not interaction, its generally a button where the game gives you stuff you can't do yourself.
The game was built around an online system that was unsupported and even worse a gameplay mechanic that was fundamentally broken. Everything else with the game is a trade off, small cities to support interactivity (not realising the interactivity was broken and fundamentally flawed and quite frankly - lacking anything of interest); meaning no positive outcome in exchange for the negative.
EA's got serious problems.
Maxis has seriously mishandled this game to a significant degree.
Neither party attempted to change the game, make fixes or even adjust...anything. Its clear they didn't think about the consumers actions. Just this floaty idea of a game with heavy social interaction and cooperation. I honestly can't say 'EA should have delayed/cancelled this!' because I honestly believe they and Maxis thought the product was as close to perfect as they could make it.
Project failure on so many levels. Driven by fundamental flaws in Maxis's development process and EA's general lack of care/attention and overall cultural failures at the organisation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What would be the better SimCity? Full control of the region. Single Player availability; but allowing City Management to be done like a Google Document. You all control different aspects.
If I want to create a multi-City region and compete...I CAN! In fact allow authorisation stuff (e.g. I can edit here, you can't). Basically you run the region together.
Why didn't Maxis do this? It wasn't some evil scheme, it was because they wanted all players to have the same experience. They wanted to make the social side more casual and not involving a lot of discussion/setting up servers. It was suppose to be like Journey, not getting in the way but promoting cooperation. A sort of 'oh hello, whose over there?'
The flaw here is that without the above...its not multiplayer. The positive outcome...isn't felt, instead as I say it becomes a 'button' to the general casual player. A weird fucking over rule and removal of general functionality.
Its just the wrong direction entirely.
Why has all this happened?
End of the day Maxis was aiming too far at the start, a lack of oversight from EA meant that the actual feasibility of the project, costs and technical needs went untested or investigated. Maxis thought it was just making an ambitious online game, and all games are online right? Neither them or EA successfully identified that games with this level of online and interactivity tend to need a lot of money behind them and this money in the long term comes from subscription, DLC or micro-transaction payments.
Not only that but Maxis failed to actually understand what they were building. I feel, as I did when they announced the game, the interactivity felt bigger in their heads and more feasible. They never thought about how much people would have to play to be interacting in a meaningful way.
Truth is that the social side of this game is a button. Its not interaction, its generally a button where the game gives you stuff you can't do yourself.
The game was built around an online system that was unsupported and even worse a gameplay mechanic that was fundamentally broken. Everything else with the game is a trade off, small cities to support interactivity (not realising the interactivity was broken and fundamentally flawed and quite frankly - lacking anything of interest); meaning no positive outcome in exchange for the negative.
EA's got serious problems.
Maxis has seriously mishandled this game to a significant degree.
Neither party attempted to change the game, make fixes or even adjust...anything. Its clear they didn't think about the consumers actions. Just this floaty idea of a game with heavy social interaction and cooperation. I honestly can't say 'EA should have delayed/cancelled this!' because I honestly believe they and Maxis thought the product was as close to perfect as they could make it.
Project failure on so many levels. Driven by fundamental flaws in Maxis's development process and EA's general lack of care/attention and overall cultural failures at the organisation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What would be the better SimCity? Full control of the region. Single Player availability; but allowing City Management to be done like a Google Document. You all control different aspects.
If I want to create a multi-City region and compete...I CAN! In fact allow authorisation stuff (e.g. I can edit here, you can't). Basically you run the region together.
Why didn't Maxis do this? It wasn't some evil scheme, it was because they wanted all players to have the same experience. They wanted to make the social side more casual and not involving a lot of discussion/setting up servers. It was suppose to be like Journey, not getting in the way but promoting cooperation. A sort of 'oh hello, whose over there?'
The flaw here is that without the above...its not multiplayer. The positive outcome...isn't felt, instead as I say it becomes a 'button' to the general casual player. A weird fucking over rule and removal of general functionality.
Its just the wrong direction entirely.
Team Filler
Member
I have. Maybe not direct indication, but more than enough to know exactly where EA wants to go.
Yeah, that's indirect.
In the original AMA thread, I don't think anyone was saying STFU or washing any balls. A few people on this board recognize that always online connections are part of where gaming is headed for better or for worse however.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
Corrupting your saves mostly.
Team Filler
Member
Is that you really believing so, or is it because it Just-Has-To because that's where Blizzard took Diablo 3?
I accidentally read that as "funeral pictures folder" and thought to myself -what twisted mind would come up with such a thing to say?
Diseased Yak
Gold Member
Hahahaaaa, just waking up and seeing this. What a day-brightener! Can't wait to see how this plays out throughout the day. Spin and crow eating, always fun to look forward to!
peanutbutterlatte
Member
Ya done goofed EA. Can't wait for the inevitable Sims 4 catastrophe.
AkimbO_Arcana
Banned
What is wrong with this guy?
only if people continue to support this bullshit. vote with your wallet and all that.
It's my honest belief and I think that Diablo 3 proves that an always online implementation does have it's benefits. In Sim City's case, the always online connection failure is paltry compared to the actual broken parts of the game that were released. The simulation break down should be where consumers are focusing their ire.
ColonelColon
Member
This is what major publishers want consumers to think. But we don't need to buy games that require a constant internet connection.
Team Filler
Member
I can agree with this, but I honestly believe it is in part the effect of them choosing to make the game always-online. Design became so focused on what could be pulled out and added later that they didn't pay nearly enough attention to making the base game actually work as SimCity is expected to work.
Holy shit this is like word for word a press release from the airlines. Just replace gamer with passenger and you've got their PR excuse for why they started nickel and diming for things you didn't use to have to pay extra for like seats, food, frequent flyer miles, and baggage.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
HAHAHA holy shit
I sound like a broken record, but as long as the constrant has some benefit to consumers then it's a win-win.
Obviously Sim City's 'benefits' of an always online connection are minuscule if they actually exist, but that is not going to stop companies from try to devise a new scheme in the future.
This is the most beautiful clusterfuck of lies and ignorance that I have witnessed in a few years.
Imagine what it's like for the lowly Maxis developer right now, all their coffee breaks and watching TV while writing the code with one hand being completely ripped apart online. Must be tough.
Imagine what it's like for the lowly Maxis developer right now, all their coffee breaks and watching TV while writing the code with one hand being completely ripped apart online. Must be tough.
eot
Banned
What benefits?
What do I as a player gain by Blizzard having cut the offline mode? What are they doing that couldn't be done in D2?
Don't tell me duping, because duping was caused by how the item system worked, not the fact that bnet wasn't secure enough. As for botting they sure as hell didn't stop that.
SneakyStephan
Banned
One was proven a corporate employed shill a few days ago, it's safe to assume there are many more.
Most will just be blubbering fanboys though or just people with the american 'as long as I get mine' mentality who like to shit on everything that doesn't affect them personally.
OT: Everyone knew this is exactly what was going to happen (though it's sooner than I expected).
Shame on anyone who supported EA with this turd.
I see EA getting a lot of sh-t for their comment about offline play needing a major redesign, put next to this apparently simple mod, but to be fair, I think EA would have more in mind than simply disabling online related features, and is probably thinking about how they would replace online-related and region features with offline surrogates.
I presume.
They do deserve a lot of criticism though, but I don't think this mod completely rubbishes the claim that a (good) offline mode would require a bit more work.
I presume.
They do deserve a lot of criticism though, but I don't think this mod completely rubbishes the claim that a (good) offline mode would require a bit more work.
ElRenoRaven
Member
Exactly. Blizzard just wanted to protect their RMAH and that's all that's why it is always online. Blizzard is equally as guilty as EA when it comes to always online DRM. That's why I didn't buy Diablo 3 and why I didn't buy Sim City. Course that might change if Diablo 3 for the PS3 & 4 actually has offline play. lol
D3 works very similarly to D2's closed battle.net. Except everyone is forced to use it rather than having separate offline and online. The reasoning they gave for this is they didn't want anyone to make a character offline and then expect to be able to play with their friends on the closed servers. The reason they didn't give is probably auction house integrity, which is why PS3 Diablo 3 likely won't have access to the AH. I always felt that people who weren't playing on closed battle.net in Diablo 2 were doing it wrong anyway, so requiring people to connect to battle.net never bothered me.
Maxis didn't have a choice, they've been a fully owned subsidiary of EA since 1997. You could probably point to their handling of Spore as the reason Will Wright left.
Majukun
Member
no it's not.
being able to play a game you've paid for whenever and wherever you want is a "benefit" that can't be exchanged with anything.
eot
Banned
Apathy is death.
Not quite. You have a local save. When quitting or periodically the game will send batched events to the server (placed road, closed dialog, completed tutorial etc). But you better hope that when 'loading' your city the server agrees with what the current state is (when loading a city, the client checks in with the server). Or that the server is online.
So no, online is only needed for saves because Maxis decided to disregard local data, to the point of fucking up your saves or rolling you back.