Sim City

I got it, let me know if anyone wants to build a region solely for HoL.

 

This thread is useless without specifying which version of Sim City and for which platform. I have Sim City 3000 and Sim City 4, both for the PC. I didn't like the region system of 4 though - I prefer having one large city on a single map, like in its predecessors.

 

The newest Sim City that was released yesterday is called Sim City.

 

I very much dislike the newfangled trend to name an n'th installment in a series as if it were the first one. Wolfenstein, Aliens versus Predator, Mortal Kombat, The Thing and now Sim City. I find the confusion it causes irritating and unnecessary.

 

It is having a really rough launch as we speak. Might have to hold off the Arcanum region till it settles itself out.

 

Sigh. I should really stop living in the past.

 

But why? We shouldn't have to put up with this shit.

 

Well, I accept that games companies have the right to distribute games however they want. Our only remedy as consumers is not to buy them, and I don't see that happening.

My issue is that in ten years time, when I finally getting around to playing this game, there is no guarantee that the servers that it wants to connect to will still be operating.

 

Well this was strike three for EA. Dragon Age 2 was terribly designed, Mass Effect 3 was terribly written and dumbed down, and now this draconian always online DRM for Sim City. This game will get fixed, and I will love playing it however future purchases from EA is fairly unlikely.

 

To ten-year-olds, it makes no difference.

You're a geezer.

 

Towns is terrible, even Dwarf Fortress is easier to learn.

 

Re:

I find that statement offensive to dwarves!

Really though? Suppose they produce the next Fallout, or a sequel to Arcanum, or another game you'd really want to play? I knew of someone once who swore off Steam, and then within a couple of years he was back on it because there was some game he wanted to play on there.

Our only real hope is that the games companies realise that complex DRM schemes just aren't worth it from a financial perspective.

 

Really Smuel, really. There has never been a game out there that I've just had to play, and with the direction my life is taking me gaming is falling into the backseat so the likelihood of keeping up with new games let alone ones developed with draconian DRM and poor plot is minimal.

Whinging aside, I can finally play the game after 30+ minutes queues (I know, queues for a single layer game). I've been building some cities and the game is fun when it is working. I would suggest waiting a week before buying it though so EA can sort their shit out.

 

Re: Re:

When comparing turning a profit to turning no profit, I suspect the companies will always find in favor of anti-piracy measures such as DRM.

 

The point is that DRM doesn't make that much difference to profits, because honest people buy the game regardless, and piratey types just don't play it. The number of people who go "I'm going to try to get this game for free, but if I can't then I'll buy it" are in the minority. The relevant question is - do these kind of DRM measures bring in more net revenue than they cost to implement? The costs include development, testing, maintaining the servers, and providing support to all the legitimate customers who experience problems. Not to mention lost sales from people who are psyched about the game at release, but hold off buying it because they hear about the launch issues, and then lose interest.

The answer in a lot of cases is no.

 

Excellent points, Smuel. I was simply regurgitating an argument by a game publisher that I read. I guarantee it is biased.

 

It appears my informative thread about DRM didn't survive the move. That or I fail at search function.

 

Actually, it is the search engine that didn't survive the move unharmed. Here is your thread.