Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
neurokirurgi

Discussion about Always-On Connection to Origin

1,352 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Another things folks are still forgetting: the number of players on multiplayer. Maxis/EA has reiterated all over the place "1-16 player multiplayer", and "play solo or with friends". You have control over who you're playing with--and that can include nobody else. This isn't CXL Planet Offer.

That we do know. But we still don't know all the details otherwise about how the global marketplace, etc. really work. We'll know more at E3, most likely.

-Tarkus


  Edited by Tarkus  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I fail to understand why beign connected to the global market is a bad thing. The whole game is based on this new technology. Without it, it will just be a 3D SC4.


  Edited by jacksunny  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should send someone from Simtropolis with a list of all these questions and speculations to E3.

"Someone from Simtropolis" is Dirk. I don't believe he has any employees.

It is important for everyone to understand that Dirk + the volunteer staff is the whole site. Dirk simply purchases web server space, hopefully not out of his own pocket, but from the donations account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really really really have a hard time trusting any sort of virtual/download purchase from any company. It is VERY hard for any large company to earn my trust (if at all) because generally speaking, large companies tend to screw over the consumer. EA did win the "worst company in America" award this year from the Consumerist after all.

My primary concern is if (er when) EA decides to shut down the servers and your game is useless. Or, what if they decide you have to install an update that they just happen to be selling for $9.99? I see it as nothing more than a continuous money grab disguised as a simulated global economy. Further, I have enough monthly bills. The last thing I want is yet another monthly charge. $9 or whatever may not seem like much, but it adds up when you have 20 or so other bills to pay each month.

The simulated global economy sounds really cool and I would perhaps want to try it, but I have absolutely zero trust in EA or their intentions. I am willing to sacrifice that functionality if it means not paying a monthly fee or giving EA the power to cripple/take away your game at their whim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more speculation...

We don't even know if there will be a monthly fee. But, there probably won't. Maxis will not let that happen.

I understand it's speculation and I am not making final judgments until actual release time. I am merely stating what I have seen these companies do in the past - notably what EA (who owns and calls the shots for Maxis) has done. They do not have a good track record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked at the forums on simcity.com and it seems like the game is getting really bad backlash pointed at EA. Every single person seems to not like the idea at all and refuse to buy it unless EA makes it offline only or atleast an option to turn online off.

If EA doesn't listen to the fans then they will just screw themself in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the idea of this on-line play. What happens if I want to play the game at my weekend Cabin out on the lake, where an internet connection is not available and besides, that is almost the only place where I can find the time to play. I suppose SC4 will stay active longer than we think, for me and many others anyways.

Another thing, who wants to play a game where you can't cheat and handle it to your liking?......lol

mrb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming that custom content will work like custom maps from FPS games, where you automatically download everything you need when you connect to the server. I really do hope it turns out that way; that might mean an end to dependency hell.

Oy! Can you imagine if the region map had hundreds of MB of custom content loaded onto it? That download would be insane for some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I feel for the people who hate the idea of the game being online-only, I'm also beginning to consider repetitive rants like this as an eye sore.

Edit: Thanks for merging the topics.


  Edited by meowza  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anno 2070 forced me to download an update that included $10 worth of DLC that is on my computer for free but I would need to pay to unlock and use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the same when talking to people in real life. I know a few people who would be considered as casual players, and not hardcore fans as most of those who writes here.

Not a single one of them are positive about the online stuff. The casual players too want to play the game in single player. It's simply that type of game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what everyone is upset about, however, the chance that EA is going to change their minds is very little. I have said this many times before and I will say it again. The main reason the game is online is because of the global market feature. Without it, all this game will be is a 3D SC4.

We need to just stop complaining about it and start being optimistic about the good features in the game, such as 3D and curvy roads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wooooow..... 3D and curvy roads? Wait, we have this in Cities XL already.....

We also had Online in Cities XL.....

Jacksunny, I admire your optimism :) 4 years ago I was feeling the same about CXL. But you know what? Since then I've come to realize that city building is, indeed, a solitary task. I think the current version of Cities XL, where you have multiple cities that are interconnected into a global economy, but are controlled entirely by you, is the best compromise.

I simply don't see how I could enjoy planning and executing my vision, while constantly having to worry about the price of Coal rising because of all these people that don't have the minimum foresight to build more advanced power plants, and always go with the cheapest option; or the price of food rising because nobody wants to bother with building farms.....

Unfortunately, the level of interconnection that Sim City 2013 promises is gonna lead to this exactly. You'll have to worry more about making connections with your neighbors and planning the global economy with them, than developing your own city. And there will be no option to simply 'plug off' - if you want your cities to stay afloat, you'll have to log in at least once a day and manage stuff.

In WOW there is at least the option to play or not to play, if you wish, and no harm done. Here if you don't play I suspect you'll risk serious damage to your cities. I remember in the times of the CXL PLanet Offer I missed to renew one single crucial contract for Heavy Industry, and my city entered into a catastrophic loop that almost led to bankrupcy. I don't see how the new Sim City would be different.

If EA plans to create a game more exigent of your attention and commitment than WOW, than they're going the right way. But somehow, I never connected this to Sim City series....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mandatory online gaming is going to be the downfall of the gaming industry.

Not just the games that only allow you t play unless your online

But its the games that will not let you download unless your online have 5 accounts need to remember 6 passwords and then cant even play it on a lap top when the power goes out. And its starting to become you need to buy digital downloads of the stupid patches even...... with done ever fix the bugs anyway just add more,

Games are fun but the truth is they are sucking up all our money so fast and making so many crappy games i am scared the video game market bubble will burst.

I hope i'm wrong. but this direction is not good for the average gamer community or the gaming economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is yet another attempt to make multi-player work. The previous attempt didn't because it was essentially off-line with uploads.

I think it will work, but the question is what is in the box? Is it just client software or the whole game with a hook to the Internet? From the system specifications, I think it has to be the whole thing with just the world economy running on the servers, posting updates both ways.

If you can exist without the "global economy" inputs, I can see no reason to connect after registration unless you want to play with more than one player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more speculation...

We don't even know if there will be a monthly fee. But, there probably won't. Maxis will not let that happen.

Maxis will do as it is told. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of EA. I doubt that Maxis is more than a studio name within EA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"First off, the U.S. is behind other countries with Internet coverage because we have 90x the landmass of other developed countries. (Japan, Korea, UK, etc. ...) "

I take umbrage at that statement. You should check sometime. Canada and Russia are larger than the U.S. and yet we (Canada) have a campaign to get high-speed Internet to every part of this vast land. I understand they are running fast (satellite) circuits now in Inuvik and most of Nunavut. I live in a rural area and have permanent broadband hook-up.

I won't comment about Russia, because I don't know.. BUT I live up here in Alaska, and I have relatives in Canada, so I think I know what I'm talking about.. And while Canada does have large amount of land not very much of it is populated... I mean pretty much the southern half is and thats about it, yes you have smaller towns scattered all over, but something like 80% of the Canadian population lives within 200 miles of the border (don't remember the numbers exactly)

Anyways up here in Alaska I am a OSP (outside plant) project manager for the largest communications provider GCI (General Communications Inc) And I can tell you that even with satellite its just not viable to get internet everywhere. We have 300 remote villages here in Alaska, and right now we have satellite internet to 280 of them... Only made possibly by federal funding, When you have 30-300ppl in a village its not cost effective to take any utilities out there. So the feds subsidies 99% of it, but even with that we are talking speeds of 64kbs max, and frequent outages (anytime heavy cloud cover/snow storms)

All of this to say: in 20-30 years we will have internet available to 99% of the U.S. And that will most likely be in the form of Cellular (4G LTE).. or something of that sort, Last fall I managed a project where we brought cable in to a small neighborhood, (I think the total count was 53 houses) and the bill for JUST putting the cable in the ground (no amps, power supplies, splitters, pads etc...) was $320,000.00

So in my opinion, until you can't get a job because you don't have internet, until you can't take care of hygiene because of no internet, until you can't feed your family because of no internet... it is a luxury, not a necessity.

Which was my original point with the poster that I quoted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"First off, the U.S. is behind other countries with Internet coverage because we have 90x the landmass of other developed countries. (Japan, Korea, UK, etc. ...) "

I take umbrage at that statement. You should check sometime. Canada and Russia are larger than the U.S. and yet we (Canada) have a campaign to get high-speed Internet to every part of this vast land. I understand they are running fast (satellite) circuits now in Inuvik and most of Nunavut. I live in a rural area and have permanent broadband hook-up.

I won't comment about Russia, because I don't know.. BUT I live up here in Alaska, and I have relatives in Canada, so I think I know what I'm talking about.. And while Canada does have large amount of land not very much of it is populated... I mean pretty much the southern half is and thats about it, yes you have smaller towns scattered all over, but something like 80% of the Canadian population lives within 200 miles of the border (don't remember the numbers exactly)

Anyways up here in Alaska I am a OSP (outside plant) project manager for the largest communications provider GCI (General Communications Inc) And I can tell you that even with satellite its just not viable to get internet everywhere. We have 300 remote villages here in Alaska, and right now we have satellite internet to 280 of them... Only made possibly by federal funding, When you have 30-300ppl in a village its not cost effective to take any utilities out there. So the feds subsidies 99% of it, but even with that we are talking speeds of 64kbs max, and frequent outages (anytime heavy cloud cover/snow storms)

All of this to say: in 20-30 years we will have internet available to 99% of the U.S. And that will most likely be in the form of Cellular (4G LTE).. or something of that sort, Last fall I managed a project where we brought cable in to a small neighborhood, (I think the total count was 53 houses) and the bill for JUST putting the cable in the ground (no amps, power supplies, splitters, pads etc...) was $320,000.00

So in my opinion, until you can't get a job because you don't have internet, until you can't take care of hygiene because of no internet, until you can't feed your family because of no internet... it is a luxury, not a necessity.

Which was my original point with the poster that I quoted.

This. I spent part of my high school years living in Elbert County, Colorado. Hardly remote compared to villages in Alaska, but 28.8 dialup was all that was available up until 2005 when I left. Satellite internet was about the same performance-wise as you mention and ridiculously expensive - $500 set-up and $150ish a month for regular consumer service. No family there could afford that. The cost to bring in cable or T-1 lines was well into the six figures and DSL was not feasible since houses were easily a mile apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Soltangris! That is the perfect compromise and one thing Cities XL 2011/2012 does very well. And since it is offline, it allows you to cheat and make mods that add further cheats (I use Kiwispanker's Bank Mod, which gives you an incredible amount of income - so you can basically trade with Omnicorp - which for those who are unaware is CXL's AI trader - as much as you want and build as much as you want with no money worries).

So far, it seems as if no one from Maxis ever reads the Sim City forums, or even that no one moderates it. Though, hopefully eventually over some more time Maxis will look at the backlash, think again, and invent an offline solo mode along with a sandbox mode. It's the one thing that is stopping so many from pre-ordering/buying this game, the fact that we have to be online in a world with other players. Make a solo offline mode = many more players = bigger profit. I don't mind if EA is making a big profit if I get a good Sim City game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main reason the game is online is because of the global market feature. Without it, all this game will be is a 3D SC4.

The main reason that the game is online is to prevent piracy and second-hand sales of the game. The main excuse for forcing people online is a global market that many of us don't wnat.


  Edited by Mootilda  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on Soltangris! That is the perfect compromise and one thing Cities XL 2011/2012 does very well. And since it is offline, it allows you to cheat and make mods that add further cheats (I use Kiwispanker's Bank Mod, which gives you an incredible amount of income - so you can basically trade with Omnicorp - which for those who are unaware is CXL's AI trader - as much as you want and build as much as you want with no money worries).

So far, it seems as if no one from Maxis ever reads the Sim City forums, or even that no one moderates it. Though, hopefully eventually over some more time Maxis will look at the backlash, think again, and invent an offline solo mode along with a sandbox mode. It's the one thing that is stopping so many from pre-ordering/buying this game, the fact that we have to be online in a world with other players. Make a solo offline mode = many more players = bigger profit. I don't mind if EA is making a big profit if I get a good Sim City game.

Just wondering, but do any of the developers from Maxis ever stop by simtropolis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the irritation over online-required, but honestly, that's why we still have Simcity 4. It's not like we're going to lose this current game when this upcoming title comes out. We can play both, SC4 for solo play and SC2013 for multiplayer. I'm okay with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an Account  

Sign up to join our friendly community. It's easy!  :thumb:

Register a New Account

Sign In  

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×