Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th Mar 2013 14:46 UTC
Games "To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. It's a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisher's burrowing." As usual, RPS hits the nail on the head so hard it shoots through the board.
Thread beginning with comment 555108
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Sing of the Times
by sparkyERTW on Mon 11th Mar 2013 15:18 UTC
sparkyERTW
Member since:
2010-06-09

This and things like this are the sad trend we're seeing in the marketplace. You see big companies like Sony, EA, Microsoft, etc. take actions against their customers and half the time the customers shrug or even applaud them for it.

Sony removes Other OS support, backwards compatibility, etc.: "Oh well, I never used it anyway". Not the f**king point. They took something away from you AFTER you purchased it. How is that not viewed as wrong? If a Frigidaire rep breaks into my house and removes the ice dispenser on my fridge that I never use, is it excusable?

EA breaks games with DRM, removes features til it's working again: "Oh well, they're just trying to keep people from stealing their stuff". That's their f**king problem, not yours; you as a loyal paying customer shouldn't be suffering for it. If someone elbows me in the face while trying to throw a hay-maker at a guy next to me, I'm still justified to be pissed as hell. And if they then turn around and say, "I appear to have broken your nose... here, have this fake nose to wear over it so you look normal again", I should not accept that as adequate.

Amazon DRM-ing public works, the walled gardens of the smartphone market - now creeping into the PC market, long-term service contracts that are entirely one-sided, etc. How long will it be before Toyota says, "if you take your car anywhere but the dealership for regular maintenance - which is mandatory - your car will lock up and you can't drive it anymore"... and we shrug our shoulders?

Edited 2013-03-11 15:22 UTC

Reply Score: 21

RE: Sing of the Times
by WorknMan on Mon 11th Mar 2013 16:08 in reply to "Sing of the Times"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

EA breaks games with DRM, removes features til it's working again: "Oh well, they're just trying to keep people from stealing their stuff"


Yep, that's pretty much it, and I think it's a justifiable reason on their part. Don't get me wrong... I would never support this model for games, but I don't blame them for doing it. I'm sure they're getting tired of people pirating their stuff, while at the same time you have a bunch of f--ktards screaming about how piracy helps the industry. I'm sorry guys, but piracy does NOT help the industry ;) You get hundreds of thousands of people torrenting games, and then you wonder why publishers resort to the online-only DRM. Hello? WTF did you think was going to happen? They're not just going to sit back and watch while you play $60 games for free.

The main argument against this kind of DRM is that you can never make something that can't be cracked, but as more and more of the code goes server-side, I'm sure they will eventually make something that's uncrackable, assuming they haven't already. So I understand the business reasons why they're doing it, and I understand this is the future.

Do I AGREE with it? No. Assuming their PC games are being pirated to the point where they would have to go out of business if they didn't resort to this model, then I'd rather see them go out of business. If I can't really own the games, I'm just not interested, unless maybe they're having a fire sale for like $10. Then it's sort of like a rental ;) Since games are only entertainment, I can easily live without them.

And I also think it's a bit hypocritical for people to shun this kind of DRM on one hand, and embrace Steam on the other. I'm not sure if Steam requires the 'always on' connection, but you're still 'buying' games that you don't really own, and that can be 'switched off' at somebody else's discretion.

Edited 2013-03-11 16:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Sing of the Times
by BushLin on Mon 11th Mar 2013 20:48 in reply to "RE: Sing of the Times"
BushLin Member since:
2011-01-26

If it were just anti piracy measures you could make that argument but in the case of Sim City they've moved part of the single player onto their servers; not for any real benefit to the game... no, just so they can add it to the following list of shut down servers in a couple of years and charge you again if you still feel like playing.

http://www.ea.com/1/service-updates

No chance they ever get another penny from me.

Edited 2013-03-11 21:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Sing of the Times
by sparkyERTW on Tue 12th Mar 2013 13:40 in reply to "RE: Sing of the Times"
sparkyERTW Member since:
2010-06-09

I think it's a justifiable reason on their part. Don't get me wrong... I would never support this model for games, but I don't blame them for doing it.


I do... because in doing so they're harming their honest, paying customers. Returning to the car metaphor, what we're seeing is not "needing a key to start your car". What we're seeing is "your car must communicate with us or it won't start, and since we've just discovered the AC, stereo, and ABS brakes create problems with that, we're going to disable those. Also, your car might occasionally fail to start or lock-up randomly."

I'm sure they're getting tired of people pirating their stuff, while at the same time you have a bunch of f--ktards screaming about how piracy helps the industry. I'm sorry guys, but piracy does NOT help the industry ;) You get hundreds of thousands of people torrenting games, and then you wonder why publishers resort to the online-only DRM. Hello? WTF did you think was going to happen? They're not just going to sit back and watch while you play $60 games for free.


Yeah, I get that, and I agree the "piracy helps" argument is a lame one. But your paying customers should not be complacent about you breaking their stuff to fight that.

The main argument against this kind of DRM is that you can never make something that can't be cracked, but as more and more of the code goes server-side, I'm sure they will eventually make something that's uncrackable


No they won't. Ever. There's always going to be someone who figures out how to get around it. So rather than fight that and piss off all your existing customers as you sell them broken products, maybe your time is better spent proving your product is worth paying for.

Do I AGREE with it? No. Assuming their PC games are being pirated to the point where they would have to go out of business if they didn't resort to this model, then I'd rather see them go out of business. If I can't really own the games, I'm just not interested, unless maybe they're having a fire sale for like $10. Then it's sort of like a rental ;) Since games are only entertainment, I can easily live without them.


Agreed.

And I also think it's a bit hypocritical for people to shun this kind of DRM on one hand, and embrace Steam on the other. I'm not sure if Steam requires the 'always on' connection, but you're still 'buying' games that you don't really own, and that can be 'switched off' at somebody else's discretion.


You have a point there. You can put Steam in an 'offline' mode where it stores a local copy of your credentials, but you're right, it could be revoked when run online. But while I agree that DRM is vile in general, what makes this case extra heinous though is that given the option between loosening the DRM and harming their loyal, paying customers, they harmed their customers. And that to me is indefensible.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Sing of the Times
by rcsteiner on Fri 15th Mar 2013 04:29 in reply to "RE: Sing of the Times"
rcsteiner Member since:
2005-07-12

How, precisely, is this action of theirs going to lessen piracy?

Edited 2013-03-15 04:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Sing of the Times
by tidux on Mon 11th Mar 2013 18:29 in reply to "Sing of the Times"
tidux Member since:
2011-08-13

That example about Toyota is illegal in my state - we have a law on the books that mandates free choice of repair shops.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Sing of the Times
by Soulbender on Tue 12th Mar 2013 01:41 in reply to "Sing of the Times"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

How long will it be before Toyota says, "if you take your car anywhere but the dealership for regular maintenance - which is mandatory - your car will lock up and you can't drive it anymore"... and we shrug our shoulders?


No, that won't happen because people will not accept it. The IT industry though, is a different ballgame. A lot of big players has spent a lot of money convincing people that the IT industry is special and need special rules and permissions. Unfortunately, the only way these companies are making the industry special is in making it more like the short bus.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Sing of the Times
by sparkyERTW on Tue 12th Mar 2013 13:14 in reply to "RE: Sing of the Times"
sparkyERTW Member since:
2010-06-09

No, that won't happen because people will not accept it.


I hope you're right about that, I really do, because while we all have the impression right now is we're only seeing this pushover (bend-over?) attitude in the IT/entertainment industry, I'm not 100% sure it'll stay that way. Yeah, I get that my Toyota example was a little extreme, but if this trend continues it might not seem that far-fetched.

Reply Parent Score: 1