Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EA Caves: SimCity Offline Mode Coming

Unknown Lamer posted about 9 months ago | from the a-bit-late dept.

Upgrades 198

iONiUM writes "After EA staunchly denied any offline mode, it would seem the disastrous SimCity launch and continual gamer community anger (as well as a CEO firing), EA finally caved and has now going to make an offline mode. However, the obvious question still remains: is it too little too late?"

cancel ×

198 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

too little too late? (5, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | about 9 months ago | (#45947187)

Why buy an EA game unless you're a masochist?

Re:too little too late? (5, Interesting)

erroneus (253617) | about 9 months ago | (#45947223)

Gamers are picture perfect examples of addiction. Not "all gamers" but there is a subset of gamers significant enough to predict that no matter how bad things get, they will wait in line to spend lots of money so they can "earn achievements." And why? Because they can't get them in real life as easily or as well. That sense of achievement is addicting and even necessary.

But it's not just gamers who suffer from this. How about all those football fans who rejoice when their team wins or gets sad when their team loses? How about those soccer fans? Have they decapitated and dismembered anyone lately? There's no end to the lunacy. None. And because of that business out there sees unlimited potential for exploitaiton.

Re:too little too late? (4, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | about 9 months ago | (#45947301)

But that argument would indicate that EA and its subsidiaries behave just like drug dealers and pimps! Oh, right... Carry on!

Re:too little too late? (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 9 months ago | (#45947493)

But that argument would indicate that EA and its subsidiaries behave just like drug dealers and pimps! Oh, right... Carry on!

Please don't compare EA with drug dealers and pimps. Both usually provide exactly what is promised; drugs, or sex. EA can't meet that standard, not by a long shot. When you buy drugs, or a girl for the night, you usually get to do what you want... not guilted at every turn and told you can't be trusted, and that instead of forking over $50 you'll be forked over for about $500,000 and a 7 year jail sentence for "piracy" because your DVD got scratched and you used a backup copy... for shame.

Re:too little too late? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947567)

You're telling me that you've never been robbed by a drug dealer? I'm not racist in most ways, but I will never, EVER buy from a black dealer. Who needs a gun to rob someone for 30$? And all I wanted was an eighth. Fuck.

not guilted at every turn and told you can't be trusted,

What? There are pimps and gangsters watching you the whole time, ready to beat and\or kill you if you don't pay. You clearly have never been a lowlife before.

Re:too little too late? (0, Offtopic)

Redmancometh (2676319) | about 9 months ago | (#45947983)

^ what this guy said
On a side note that's the only place I'm racist...most white dealers are 19 year olds from the burbs..and they're afraid of ME.

EA actually acts the opposite of most dealers and pimps. Most of them (as long as you pay and don't say stupid shit) are umcomfortably proud of having "the best product, " and even ask for feedback!

They also take corrective action. You better believe if a dude doesn't get anal and tells upgrayyd cinammon is gonna have a black eye.

Re:too little too late? (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | about 9 months ago | (#45948007)

But once you pay the money, the drugs are yours. They no longer care what you do with them. Share, do it all yourself, whatever. They don't show up at your door demanding to see your license when you try to open the package. They actually prefer that you DON'T call them and ask for permission each time you want to use some of the drugs they sold you.

Re:too little too late? (1, Offtopic)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 9 months ago | (#45948151)

They'll come asking for a cut if they find you're on-selling their drugs for a profit though.

Re:too little too late? (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 9 months ago | (#45947679)

When you buy drugs, or a girl for the night, you usually get to do what you want... not guilted at every turn and told you can't be trusted, and that instead of forking over $50 you'll be forked over for about $500,000 and a 7 year jail sentence for "piracy" because your DVD got scratched and you used a backup copy...

Something tells me that when you finally save up and buy that girl for the night, you will be very disappointed...

Re:too little too late? (4, Informative)

rhodium_mir (2876919) | about 9 months ago | (#45947965)

Between The Erotic Review [theeroticreview.com] and TNA Board [tnaboard.com] it's generally pretty easy to get what you paid for as long as you go with a reputable provider.

Re:too little too late? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947701)

Drug dealers and pimps are HONEST compared to the likes of EA. Drug dealers and pimps rely on a good reputation for their business.

EA on the other hand has won worst company of the year twice. And looking to win a 3rd time so far.

Re:too little too late? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948419)

Gamers are picture perfect examples of addiction. Not "all gamers" but there is a subset of gamers significant enough to predict that no matter how bad things get, they will wait in line to spend lots of money so they can "earn achievements." And why? Because they can't get them in real life as easily or as well. That sense of achievement is addicting and even necessary.

But it's not just gamers who suffer from this. How about all those football fans who rejoice when their team wins or gets sad when their team loses? How about those soccer fans? Have they decapitated and dismembered anyone lately? There's no end to the lunacy. None. And because of that business out there sees unlimited potential for exploitaiton.

Should be modded for "Funny". This has nothing to do with addiction, unless your a loner with no friends. These "online" games are strictly to limit a players abilities so publishers/makers can suck as much money out of a game as possible. Before these "online" games players could go thru a game at there own pace [they still do the same thing with online] and achieve the necessary items to go to the next level.

The fact that there is a backlash against online "pay as you go' or 'pay to cheat' gaming shows how little there is an addiction.

For the web games like Zygna it is the same, you can acquire items thru friends or earn them, but if you want to cheat and jump in levels quickly you can just buy [cheat] your way up. It becomes a competition, to see who can out do who on the scoreboard.

Re:too little too late? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948511)

The reason a lot of people play games is because they provide a challenge that's fun to overcome. There's a certain satisfaction that comes with solving the obstacles presented in a game, and the harder the obstacle, the greater the level of satisfaction. Don't be a sourpuss by extrapolating this to mean their real life lacks any means of gaining satisfaction.

But even if that's indeed true, it's also harsh to have a go at the gamer because let's face it, life sucks for a LOT of people. They go to a dead-end job doing something they hate, then go home in their shitty car because they can't afford anything better, then sit at home worried about whether they'll have a job to come home to the next day. Gaming is a form of escapism and a means of achieving satisfaction from accomplishment, and is increasingly popular precisely BECAUSE society itself is fucked. Given the pressures companies put on their employees these days, no wonder people have no sense of achievement anywhere except in gaming, which readily rewards the player for successes that their efforts in real life tend to go unacknowledged, or worse, continually berated for.

For a lot of (most?) people, life is just about existing because the alternative (death) is not particularly desirable. So they end up becoming addicts as you say because games provide the satisfaction of accomplishment they don't get in real life, because real life is a harsh mistress. It's not always the fault of the gamer, and you need to understand this.

Re:too little too late? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948743)

In real life, mastering a skill will probably involve long stretches of hard work and practice, with insignificant, if any, immediate visible improvements in between. Video games are mostly designed to offer incremental visible progress toward a goal. Grinding to the next level may take hours or days, but the experience points pool provides the comfort that you are closer to your goal. Getting a perfect ranking on a stage in an action game requires time and practice, and usually getting perfect rankings in smaller sub-'stages'. But the game usually offers more than enough information to provide a sense of improvement, whether it's faster times, higher scores, better rankings in sub-stages, etc.

Re:too little too late? (4, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | about 9 months ago | (#45947391)

Because games aren't created by the publishers, and sometimes a publisher contracts/purchases a development studio that actually knows it's shit?

Freudian Slip (5, Funny)

Roger W Moore (538166) | about 9 months ago | (#45947925)

sometimes a publisher contracts/purchases a development studio that actually knows it's shit?

Well that would be the case for EA. I imagine most development studios "know it is shit" by now. You did mean to include that apostrophe right?

Re:Freudian Slip (1)

r0ball (1848426) | about 9 months ago | (#45948459)

Know your shit, or know you're shit.

EA Sports: It's in the game (3, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947399)

Because EA owns exclusive rights to professional and collegiate football. Last time I checked, EA was the exclusive licensee of NFL, NCAA, and FIFA rosters.

Re:too little too late? (5, Insightful)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 9 months ago | (#45947503)

It's never too late to start doing the right thing.

If the new SimCity adds an offline mode, and you're a SimCity gamer, you should support it, and shun other games that are needlessly connected.

Re:too little too late? (5, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | about 9 months ago | (#45947715)

But they're not fixing other issues, like the minuscule city size. They're probably only doing the "right" thing here so that they can save on server costs.

Re:too little too late? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947791)

A solution is worthless if it isn't completely perfect?

Re:too little too late? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947889)

But it's not a complete solution. At best, it's a step in the right direction (though probably too late...).

Re:too little too late? (4, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | about 9 months ago | (#45948051)

Sometimes, yes. For example, if my arm gets chopped off, a perfect solution would be to reattach it and make it good as new. An imperfect but acceptable solution would be to clean up the wound and give me a prosthetic. What EA is doing is offering to move my watch to my remaining wrist. It's nice and all, but it doesn't solve the problem I'm actually concerned with.

SimCity is still a huge disappointment to fans of the franchise. A dull, buggy, pared-down game that works offline isn't much better than one that requires the internet.

Ya that is near as big a problem (4, Informative)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 9 months ago | (#45948487)

The limit in the new Sim City is 2km x 2km. That is pathetic. Literally all you can create is a couple city blocks, or a very tiny small town. I mean I live close enough to work to bike in, and I live a good deal further than that (8km).

While there are always limits as to what you can do reasonably in a game, this limit is way too small to be fun. It isn't a matter of being able to create a "big city" it is a matter that almost all small towns are far larger than that.

Apparently they aren't fixing it either. They say the performance isn't good on larger cities, which translates to "We fucked our engine up bad so it can't scale at all."

Unless that is fixed as well, I wouldn't get it. Offline mode is a requisite for sure, but if gameplay is still broken then it isn't worth money.

Re:Ya that is near as big a problem (3, Interesting)

ultranova (717540) | about 9 months ago | (#45948841)

Apparently they aren't fixing it either. They say the performance isn't good on larger cities, which translates to "We fucked our engine up bad so it can't scale at all."

If, as EA claimed, every resident - and everything else to the last spark of electricity - actually gets simulated individually at the level of walking on street, then the engine likely scales linearly (twice the residents require twice the computing power); it's just that even a small town requires route-finding for tens of thousands of agents in realtime, which is not feasible.

Not that this should had been a surprise to anyone, given that other games that simulate individuals at this level - such as Tropico - aim for a few thousand residents tops.

Re:too little too late? (5, Insightful)

Common Joe (2807741) | about 9 months ago | (#45947919)

It's never too late to start doing the right thing.

If the new SimCity adds an offline mode, and you're a SimCity gamer, you should support it, and shun other games that are needlessly connected.

Disagree for two reasons. 1) Once I despise a company so much that I boycott them, then I'm boycotting them until they proved to me they have made real changes to their management structure and their attitude. How many times have companies suddenly "wised up" only to do something worse on their next game? EA is among the worst of those offenders. Even if they did a 180 tomorrow, I'll be watching for years before I buy anything from EA. I know there will always be people who think like you so most companies with this crap attitude do have the chance to redeem themselves. Even if EA went under, I wouldn't feel bad for the management at all. I'm not even sure I'd feel bad for the programmers and artists... which brings me to point 2.

2) EA has treated their employees so bad, a wife got online and wrote a very shaming letter [livejournal.com] back in 2004. They aren't the only guilty company either. Has it gotten better? I haven't heard anything saying how things have improved. In fact, I generally keep reading how bad it is to work in the AAA gaming industry. I even know someone personally who works in the AAA gaming industry and he recently mentioned something about mold issues in the office where he was expected to work and it caused him to get very sick. (It wasn't EA.)

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think you should not support SimCity until EA cleans up its act. If the company goes under, let it be a message to the other companies to clean up their acts. If they all go under, then that gives the little companies an opportunity to thrive -- something which I think is badly needed.

Re:too little too late? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948641)

It's never too late to start doing the right thing.

If the new SimCity adds an offline mode, and you're a SimCity gamer, you should support it, and shun other games that are needlessly connected.

Why? It is still a horribly bad game.

Re:too little too late? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948835)

Never too late? Bullshit.

I would have potentially cared about the game at launch. But they fucked it up.

I would have considered it for a few months after but the bugs were hilarious.

I would have considered buying it when it was on sale on Steam over the christmas holidays. But they moved way too slow with this always on restriction.

Right now? Got other shit to play. I may look into their crap if I see it on sale for a couple bucks one day, but beyond that I'm no longer interested in the latest SimCity.

So yes, too late.

Re:too little too late? (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 9 months ago | (#45948165)

If it truly is a proper offline mode then I will buy it. I really really wanted SimCity as it is something I play in airports and while travelling to pass the time. The online only mode while I could have still enjoyed it in a more limited use scenario, I refused to buy it as I don't want them to think this sort of shit is ok.

Re:too little too late? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948373)

Why buy an EA game unless you're a masochist?

Fine then I guess I am a masochist!! And who needs to buy the games when you can get them by other means!!

There sports games suck, but some of the games they sell [or you can obtain thru other means] aren't bad.

And again everyone bad mouths the console makers for implementing DRM when EA is living proof of publishers/game makers forcing this upon everyone. If you think indie games are going to be any better they will be implementing it as well, when they create a games that become a mainstream success.

Re:too little too late? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 9 months ago | (#45948817)

Why buy an EA game unless you're a masochist?

Perhaps you missed the headline? EA Caves: SimCity Offline Mode Coming

Why buy a game with Offline Mode made in EA's Caves?!
You'd have to be a Sadist AND a Masochist...
Hmm, or suffering from Stockholm syndrome.

Might actually buy it now. (1)

_Shorty-dammit (555739) | about 9 months ago | (#45947189)

I might actually buy it now. That was a ridiculous policy.

Not for me (1)

aussiedood (577993) | about 9 months ago | (#45947193)

Lack of offline play kept me away. I'll likely purchase a copy now.

Re:Not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947225)

its EA they'll find another way to fuck you over soon enough

i can't believe a company as terrible to their customers as EA still exists in a free market

Re:Not for me (4, Interesting)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947457)

The market is not free for several reasons, two directly related to EA and one not so directly.
  • EA holds the exclusive license to several major sport leagues' rosters.
  • EA has claimed in a lawsuit (EA v. Zynga) that its copyright in The Sims Mobile extends to ownership of gameplay elements. This lawsuit was settled out of court, but it still contributes to a chilling effect on development of video games in the same genres as certain flagship EA titles.
  • Currently, there are three companies, whose names start with M, N, and S, with effective veto power over playing a video game on a television. I'm told only a commercially insignificant fraction of game buyers use a television as a a desktop PC's monitor, and this will remain true unless and until Steam Machines become popular.

Re:Not for me (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948243)

Common Joe [slashdot.org] called attention to this letter [livejournal.com] . Perhaps you shouldn't buy a copy.

Re:Not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948345)

Don't bother, the cities are too tiny. The "multi-city" concept is a failure. Just mod up Sim City 4.

Maybe next time (2)

starX (306011) | about 9 months ago | (#45947197)

I tend to agree it's probably too little too late for SimCity, but hopefully EA and other game companies will learn a lesson from this disaster. The fact that they are willing to release an offline mode hints that such hope is not completely unrealistic.

Re:Maybe next time (4, Interesting)

PsychoSlashDot (207849) | about 9 months ago | (#45947219)

Not a chance. I predict there will be relatively few sales because of the "too little, too late" status, and EA will simply conclude that they were right all along... offline mode doesn't matter.

Errr ... (2)

TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) | about 9 months ago | (#45947289)

"hopefully EA and other game companies will learn a lesson from this disaster"

Keep it in Pandora's box dude!

If EA was gonna learn, it would have happened a LONG time ago.

They are essentially a holding company of intellectual property, not an actual game maker, and their management will always be "holding company" type of executives that manage brands. Like a magazine holding company.

Pandora's box (2)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947491)

Keep it in Pandora's box dude!

What makes Pandora's box [wikipedia.org] any better than, say, Spotify's box [wikipedia.org] ?

</groan>

Re:Pandora's box (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 9 months ago | (#45948183)

Who's Pandora and why are we putting things in her box?

Re:Pandora's box (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 9 months ago | (#45948549)

I knew a girl at school called Pandora. Never got to see her box, though.

Re:Maybe next time (5, Insightful)

jd2112 (1535857) | about 9 months ago | (#45947463)

I tend to agree it's probably too little too late for SimCity, but hopefully EA and other game companies will learn a lesson from this disaster. The fact that they are willing to release an offline mode hints that such hope is not completely unrealistic.

Or more likely, "Hey, we've made about all the money we can off of Sim City but it's costing money to run those servers for online play. We had better release a fix for offline play before we shut them down to avoid a nasty class-action suit."

Re:Maybe next time (3, Funny)

pspahn (1175617) | about 9 months ago | (#45948275)

And just wait until they start yelling about how once they allowed offline mode, piracy skyrocketed.

See! They were right!

Late? (1)

Groo Wanderer (180806) | about 9 months ago | (#45947199)

You mean there was someone EA hadn't terminally pissed off before this debacle? Could have fooled me.

          -Charlie

Community Wins.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947213)

Oh and by the way.... haha.

Not sure this is a "Cave" (5, Interesting)

Ksevio (865461) | about 9 months ago | (#45947229)

With offline mode, EA can now shut down the servers that were once required while still selling the game. Since SimCity isn't subscription based, the servers are just a drain of money for them at this point since the hype died down and not many are going to pirate it.

Come a few months they'll be announcing that the online portion will be shuttered, but look forward to the next great EA release!

Re:Not sure this is a "Cave" (3, Interesting)

JoeMerchant (803320) | about 9 months ago | (#45947525)

I can't express how disillusioned I was when GT5 Prologue killed their (lame, stuttery) online racing servers. For me, $60 is a damn investment, and I didn't expect to be losing features a couple of years after making that investment.

Re:Not sure this is a "Cave" (2)

camperdave (969942) | about 9 months ago | (#45947577)

When I read the headline, I assumed Electronic Arts was producing a fully immersive environment console in which to play SIM City. After all, what else could EA Caves: SimCity Offline Mode Coming mean?

Re:Not sure this is a "Cave" (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 9 months ago | (#45947631)

It is a cave though: they tried to claim it wasn't possible to run the game offline.

Re:Not sure this is a "Cave" (1)

guises (2423402) | about 9 months ago | (#45947975)

Agreed. I suspect that they never got the sales that they needed to make Farmville-style paid DLC to be viable.

Rebranding Opportunity (4, Funny)

gregor-e (136142) | about 9 months ago | (#45947231)

Since they're not going to increase the city size, perhaps EA should consider rebranding it as "Sim Village".

Sim Crossing (1)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947509)

Since they're not going to increase the city size

The original Micropolis-based SimCity [wikipedia.org] limited cities to 120 cells by 100 cells, where each cell is the size of one house in an R zone, one patch of road, etc. Are cities in the new SimCity even smaller than that?

perhaps EA should consider rebranding it as "Sim Village".

Except that concept is taken. Nintendo calls it Animal Crossing.

Re:Sim Crossing (2)

Mashiki (184564) | about 9 months ago | (#45947819)

No they're larger than 120x100 cells, the problem is people are used to the massive cityscapes they could create in SC3/4 and rightfully expected the same.

Re:Sim Crossing (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 9 months ago | (#45947955)

The original Sim City was like a quarter century ago. Now, my expectations for EA games and how innovative they are are very, very low, but that's ridiculous.

Hint: A few years passed since the original SC. A few versions of the game did so, too.

Re:Sim Crossing (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about 9 months ago | (#45948359)

Odd how it seems that long ago, and damned if I can still remember playing it in school. Now if only we could get a simearth, simant, and simfarm again I could relive the years I wasted playing them.

Re:Rebranding Opportunity (1)

GrahamCox (741991) | about 9 months ago | (#45947545)

Village? Hamlet more like. How about calling it "Shamlet". Sound appropriate.

Re:Rebranding Opportunity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948265)

I would assume that once an offline version is provided, it opens up the floodgates for the hacker/modder community to provide a version that greatly expands city sizes. The Simcity community has a long history of workarounds with SC4, and frankly some of the stuff they accomplished in it amazes me. If EA doesn't provide it, expect the community itself to create a region creation tool, editing the city lot size, etc.

Re:Rebranding Opportunity (1)

lgw (121541) | about 9 months ago | (#45948403)

A better name would be Sim Town [wikipedia.org] : at least then it would be old-school (a friend of mine was a dev on that - wow, that was a long time ago).

And by "too little"... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45947235)

You mean the size of the city plots, right?

I don't buy any game that's "On-line only" (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 9 months ago | (#45947255)

And I can't see why anyone else would.

EA who? (1)

Yahooti (3401115) | about 9 months ago | (#45947267)

They're still in business? I walked away and never looked back. Don't see any reason to do so now either.

What would EA have to do? (5, Funny)

TsuruchiBrian (2731979) | about 9 months ago | (#45947283)

What would EA have to do to get me to ever buy another EA game again?

1. Atonement: They could become a nonprofit organization and only come out with open source games that ran on linux with all profits going to charities to help children in 3rd world countries learn to program.

2. Deception: Change their name, and payoff every website that I visit and everyone I know not to tell me that they changed their name.

3. Coercion: Kidnap someone I care about and threaten to kill them if I don;t buy one of their games.

4. Temptation: Start some crazy PR stunt where if EA sells X copies of a game, the CEO will literally eat the collectors edition of the game (the disc, the box, the manuals, the collectible miniatures, and any cancer causing chemicals, etc), and by some arcane loophole in the law this turns out to be enforceable by by the courts.

Re:What would EA have to do? (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#45947515)

5. Make a game you really want to play.

That's how it is with games. And if you happen to be one of the few principled enough to follow through with what you said (despite really wanting to play it), EA won't care because there will be plenty of other gamers to take your place.

Re:What would EA have to do? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947857)

6. Give me a woman.

God, I hope I am marked insightful for this post.

Re:What would EA have to do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947969)

EA is incapable of making a game I want to play at this point.
I'm a fan of sim city, and of the C&C series, but I haven't bothered buying all the latest versions because EA is shitting all over it.
Besides, their games aren't on steam, and I'm not going to create some BS EA account just so I can buy their expensive games.

Re:What would EA have to do? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948145)

5. Make a game you really want to play.

Come on, man. GP was trying to stick to realistic possibilities.

Re:What would EA have to do? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948807)

Less likely than the CEO eating Mirror's Edge 2: Now With Nothing That Made The Original Game Good: Special Collector's Ultimate Edition. Unfortunately, publishing a decent game may be another matter.

Micropolis (1)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947547)

Atonement: They could become a nonprofit organization and only come out with open source games that ran on linux

EA has taken one step toward that, donating the original Micropolis-based SimCity to One Laptop Per Child under a free software license [slashdot.org] .

Re:Micropolis (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45948023)

You are a fucking tool if you think that's an example of any kind of virtue.

Re:Micropolis (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 9 months ago | (#45948635)

Sometimes it's not bad to be considered a fucking tool.

yes... (1)

jddeluxe (965655) | about 9 months ago | (#45947315)

too late...

"EA Caves"? (4, Funny)

Michael Woodhams (112247) | about 9 months ago | (#45947363)

Here was I thinking they'd released a Minecraft clone.

Re:"EA Caves"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947749)

Here was I thinking they'd released a Minecraft clone.

Quick, somebody file a lawsuit!
He's leaking corporate secrets!

Too little too late? (1)

Kuroji (990107) | about 9 months ago | (#45947365)

Day late and a dollar short is an understatement here.

Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947379)

I might buy it if I remember. I definitely would have bought it a few weeks ago to play on the plane during Christmas travel season.

Too late, still a bad game (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947433)

Even with offline mode, you're still limited to a small city and forced to make multiple cities in order to meet the needs of one bigger city...

Yes (2)

atari2600a (1892574) | about 9 months ago | (#45947505)

Yes it is. Even on Android their game development is just....sad. You turn on The Simpsons: Timehole or whatever & it spends the first 10 minutes updating (what's the point of using Google Play package management if you pull shit like this?) & you spend the next 30 minutes trying to get your phone to charge after dropping from 50% to 2% before the opening cutscene finishes. It's sad & it's fucking disgusting.

50 MB limit (2)

tepples (727027) | about 9 months ago | (#45947591)

You turn on The Simpsons: Timehole or whatever & it spends the first 10 minutes updating (what's the point of using Google Play package management if you pull shit like this?)

Let me explain: Google Play can distribute APKs up to 50 MB. This is big enough for the executable but not big enough for the graphical and audio assets of any game bigger than an N64 game, and a lot of games download these assets from the publisher's server to the game's private folder on first run.

Re:50 MB limit (4, Informative)

Shados (741919) | about 9 months ago | (#45947687)

google play allows expansion files at 2gb each (I think it lets you have up to two, for a total of 4gb).

Re:50 MB limit (1)

atari2600a (1892574) | about 9 months ago | (#45948249)

Tapped Out can't be more complex than, say, that pokemon tetris-jewel-whatever game on N64, let alone Ocarina of Time (which really saw the engine exploited w/ Majoras Mask because of the extra 4MB of VRAM). That pokemon game had roughly the same full-motion video quality & as far as I give 2 shits to care, it probably had just as much content as well. Ocarina of Time takes 2 hours of time just to meet the princess not because of complexity, but because of the 1 1/2hr of cutscenes. Even w/o the asset files, that initial 30MB download is way too much for the executable.

Now need network Addon Mod, and bigger maps (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 9 months ago | (#45947527)

Now need network Addon Mod and bigger maps as a start to maybe make me want to buy this game. also simcity 4 zoning as well.

now what about giving out the source code for simcity 4?

Kids can access P0RN sites while playing SimCity (-1, Flamebait)

PythonM (2184020) | about 9 months ago | (#45947557)

There is no way to restrict access, by turning off internet. Many kids are smarter than parents in using computers and getting around parental control. EA should be responsible for any harm done to your children. Why do our kids see boys kissing each other in Sims3 University?

F$#$ you EA!

Re:Kids can access P0RN sites while playing SimCit (-1, Troll)

Adam Colley (3026155) | about 9 months ago | (#45947659)

Why do you think your kids would care?

Homophobia is well on the way to being consigned to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

See the 'race mixing' protests of 50 years ago for an example.

Re:Kids can access P0RN sites while playing SimCit (-1, Troll)

PythonM (2184020) | about 9 months ago | (#45947957)

In Sims3 University, mMy son's sim (male) got pregnant and had a baby (he told me that it was with aliens). Sims should be Mature rated or have an option to remove gay propaganda.

STOP GAY BULLYING!

EA did the smart thing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947581)

The majority of most video game sales happen in the immediate future after the game is released, and the hype is still fresh. By requiring server connection (DRM), EA reduced piracy in the big selling period. Now that over a year has passed, and future sales will be only a small fraction of sales to date, removal of DRM will only have a minor reduction of sales, while at the same time making life better for the hardcore simcity fans (the ones who still play it).

Challenge Everything (2)

hduff (570443) | about 9 months ago | (#45947675)

Including this.

Re:Challenge Everything (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 9 months ago | (#45947981)

Challenged by everything is a more apt slogan for them.

Re:Challenge Everything (1)

KiwiRed (598427) | about 9 months ago | (#45948029)

I think you mean "Monetize everything"

i'll buy it if (1)

issicus (2031176) | about 9 months ago | (#45947747)

they put it on steam for 5 bucks and it has offline play.

Re:i'll buy it if (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 9 months ago | (#45948213)

Geez they finally do the right thing after people yelled and screamed at how badly they fucked up and make it offline capable and you beg for it to be tied back into an online DRM system. Why for gods sake?

"Caved in"?- what a cretinous spin (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947755)

The most desirable single-player games from big publishers have a history of suffering such DRM schemes on initial release- and a history of the torturous DRM being removed later in the game's life, when further sales need more consumer friendly incentives. The ONLY thing that would dissuade EA from doing the same thing all over again with their next similar title would be if THIS SimCity had flopped, but actually it did very well indeed. So well, that its secondary and tertiary sales periods expect great sales too- hence this puff piece on Slashdot.

Here's a clue for the clueless. When a blockbusting Hollywood movie hits the big screen, the industry moves heaven and Earth to try to minimise piracy. Three years later, the SAME product is playing for free on broadcast TV, and Hollywood couldn't care less about what people are doing with it.

TO LITTLE TOO LATE! (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947769)

EA GAMES - we fuckup everything

Seriously. They killed a giant cash cow with the death of simcity. 2k and 4 are still in the most popular games of all time catagory. How they managed to fuck that up is simply amazing. That took serious work and skill to fuckup so completely! They even had the perfect model handed to them with all the custom mods out there for simcity4. All they had to do was grab a few of those. Slap it on a new compile that plays happy and nice with vista+. Upgrade the graphics some. And bam. Continue to rake in millions for another decade or more!

The fact they could not do this is astounding.

And now? Fuckem.. Simcity is dead to me.. (anything after 4 anyway) A game i have paid for a total of 9 times because i LIKED it and wanted it everywhere.
Dead. Not one cent will they ever get again from me.

Hopefully a bunch of stupid fuck managers get fired over all the monumentally stupid things that killed the simcity cash cow. Because they deserve it.

(still blows my mind how they managed to fuckup something so completely like that. when they had how many years of past code and experience and customer feedback to build upon)

Re:TO LITTLE TOO LATE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947863)

Totally Agree, my most played games were Sim City and Sim Tower. Since they decided not to make any version that works on any PC , they are losting money on Sim Tower, totally most awesome game ever invented ever. Now they kill Sim City and then they dont know whey gamers stop playing their games.

Totally stupid incompetant retarded management ever recorded since the beginning of time.
Stupid Stupid Stupid.

Not to mention the theft of gaming culture by those stupid companys, and the loss of the possible future games we could have played and all been all the better for.

Sweet. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45947789)

Sweet, now I can pirate it. Suckers.

Re:Sweet. (4, Interesting)

Dan Askme (2895283) | about 9 months ago | (#45948039)

Most pirates stay away from dogshit.

Well, let's see... (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 9 months ago | (#45948011)

First, how did you make that miracle happen? I was told time and again by your spin department that it is utterly, hopelessly impossible to even fathom thinking about pondering creating something that could resemble something akin to an offline mode, and now you simply snapped your fingers and it comes into existence? You definitely are geniuses, the wizards of software development. Just outta curiosity, did you hire off the miracle workers from MS that managed to untie IE and the underlying OS?

Second, did the plot size grow? Or will we still be limited to towns, erh, villages the size of the average Texas backyard?

And finally, will you have the audacity to try to charge premium price again for that ancient piece of software or will we find it priced for the bargain bin, i.e. where we should've found it in the first place?

piracy (2)

NickeZ (921522) | about 9 months ago | (#45948377)

The only ones affected by offline mode are the guys who bought the game...

Alternatives, if you like the game consept. (5, Informative)

fjin (36284) | about 9 months ago | (#45948429)

To play city building game, you don't have to rely to products of EA. There is few free alternatives aroud.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?