• Moose

LillySatou

Member
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last Visited

About LillySatou

  • Rank
    Junior

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  1. They actually counted on it. I read early articles where Ocean was saying how cool it would be for a neighbor to wreak havoc on other players. This is by design because they thought it would be fun. Wow that's... I don't know what to say. From my experience, I gotta say things are way beyond from what they've thought of "fun." like most things they probably didn't even playtest it and thought it would be. now that people are playing the game on a large scale they are scrambling. they don't get the point of a beta.
  2. pretty obvious this was going to happen in the game. obviously, like most things, Maxis didn't take it in to consideration at all.
  3. Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty. I foresee this happening with other reviews as well. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to accuse people of corruption in the future. I don't retract anything I said previously - I still think the original review was nothing more than a corporate lovefest gush, and I don't even think SimCity deserves an 8. So you still believe that they were bribed by EA, but also that you misjudged them? I believe that it is likely their review scores are influenced by factors other than journalistic integrity, yes. That being said, I am happy to see them change their review score. But I think they mostly did it because of the public outcry. It's quite clear the game deserves nothing near perfect praise and a 9.5/10. Surely you must agree. I think that if the online element worked as it should, the game could certainly deserve 9.5. I found the one hour beta to be more engaging than many other highly-rated-by-reviewers games that I have played. Now arguably, game review scores are inflated in general, but that's endemic to the entire industry rather than confined to specific reviewers. And it looks like you got your wish, because the game is now rated at 4/10 by Polygon. I found all the betas to be extremely disappointing. Sure, the simulation and data layers are nice and pretty, but at the end of the day you are working inside a tiny rectangle surrounded by nothingness. While cities are connected in some ways, Their interaction is nothing short of awkward. Also, the fact that multiplayer is pretty much forced on to the player I think is an insult to the fanbase. It was foolish of Maxis to ignore the fanbase and give them something they never asked for. The customer is always right. I find it really hard to believe that a true Sim City fan would give this game a 9.5/10. Now a 4 is really more like it, especially in the game's current state. At best , if you ignore the rest of the franchise's history, it might deserve a 6 or a 7 if you're feeling generous. In any case, I have a little more respect for Polygon now. It's just really hard for me these days to take a non-indie game review site seriously after all the hilarious scores given to terrible games last year by sites like IGN. I don't want to rehash all these arguments again. But I can tell you I am a true Simcity fan (I bought Simcity 4 and Rush Hour on their release days). Your understanding of a review is flawed, I believe. It should not be based on the franchise's history. It should be judged on its own merits alone. Your assertion that the customer is right is predicated on the idea that all customers think like you. Me disputing your assessment should be enough to convince you that this is not the case. By the way, I'm not sure what your criteria for 'indie' are. Polygon are a very new operation, and they are independent in the sense that they are not owned by a media conglomerate. In a franchise, people come to expect improvements upon its predecessors. The game is called "Sim City", henceforth, it is part of the Sim City line of games. Just because they didn't put a 5 at the end of it doesn't change the fact everyone is considering it exactly that. On its own merit, it is not a simulation of a city. It is a simulation of small chunks of cities, with some sort of Anno-type trading mechanism behind it. For a city-building game on its own merit, it's somewhat above average. Candidate for "Game of the Year"? If so, we don't have a lot to look forward to. My assertion that the customer is right is the assertion of every successful business ever created. Polygon is not owned by a media conglomerate, but they have major financial backing from the industry. You're a bit overzealous about defending them. I find it funny.
  4. Dan Stapleton spent plenty of time arguing with people about how always-online wasn't a big deal. This is a bit disingenous coming from him now. The problems are so glaring after so many botched launches, even the biggest fans of always-online DRM have to face the music now.
  5. Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty. I foresee this happening with other reviews as well. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to accuse people of corruption in the future. I don't retract anything I said previously - I still think the original review was nothing more than a corporate lovefest gush, and I don't even think SimCity deserves an 8. So you still believe that they were bribed by EA, but also that you misjudged them? I believe that it is likely their review scores are influenced by factors other than journalistic integrity, yes. That being said, I am happy to see them change their review score. But I think they mostly did it because of the public outcry. It's quite clear the game deserves nothing near perfect praise and a 9.5/10. Surely you must agree. I think that if the online element worked as it should, the game could certainly deserve 9.5. I found the one hour beta to be more engaging than many other highly-rated-by-reviewers games that I have played. Now arguably, game review scores are inflated in general, but that's endemic to the entire industry rather than confined to specific reviewers. And it looks like you got your wish, because the game is now rated at 4/10 by Polygon. I found all the betas to be extremely disappointing. Sure, the simulation and data layers are nice and pretty, but at the end of the day you are working inside a tiny rectangle surrounded by nothingness. While cities are connected in some ways, Their interaction is nothing short of awkward. Also, the fact that multiplayer is pretty much forced on to the player I think is an insult to the fanbase. It was foolish of Maxis to ignore the fanbase and give them something they never asked for. The customer is always right. I find it really hard to believe that a true Sim City fan would give this game a 9.5/10. Now a 4 is really more like it, especially in the game's current state. At best , if you ignore the rest of the franchise's history, it might deserve a 6 or a 7 if you're feeling generous. In any case, I have a little more respect for Polygon now. It's just really hard for me these days to take a non-indie game review site seriously after all the hilarious scores given to terrible games last year by sites like IGN.
  6. They've taken quite the beating on Metacritic, Amazon, and anywhere else where users can leave a game score. Even a Maxis dev agreed with a redditor that the SimCity launch is arguably the worst PC launch in gaming history.
  7. Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty. I foresee this happening with other reviews as well. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to accuse people of corruption in the future. I don't retract anything I said previously - I still think the original review was nothing more than a corporate lovefest gush, and I don't even think SimCity deserves an 8. So you still believe that they were bribed by EA, but also that you misjudged them? I believe that it is likely their review scores are influenced by factors other than journalistic integrity, yes. That being said, I am happy to see them change their review score. But I think they mostly did it because of the public outcry. It's quite clear the game deserves nothing near perfect praise and a 9.5/10. Surely you must agree.
  8. couldn't have said it better myself. if there was one thing EA/Maxis should have done right, it was the launch. that time has come and gone and this game will forever be marred by its launch. the gaming world was watching and what it saw was ugly. the only thing they can do now to save face is learn from their mistakes and either fix SC2013 or get the next one right.
  9. Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty. I foresee this happening with other reviews as well. Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to accuse people of corruption in the future. I don't retract anything I said previously - I still think the original review was nothing more than a corporate lovefest gush, and I don't even think SimCity deserves an 8.
  10. so long as they always keep that edit in , always reminding people about the fact that the launch was so bad that it forced them to lower their review score, i'm fine with that.
  11. http://www.polygon.com/game/simcity-2013/2630 Seems like I may have misjudged Polygon, as this has concerned them and thus have lowered their score of the game from 9.5/10 to an 8 due to the glaring issues with the game. I still think that score is too high, but I have to give them credit for their honesty. I foresee this happening with other reviews as well.
  12. Right, because our experience with every other online game, EVER, agrees with this... oh wait, no it doesn't. Every MMO ever released had overcrowding at launch for the simple reason that every player wanted to play a lot on the very first day. The average MMO gamer plays twice as many hours per week for the first week or so that he does for the rest of his game lifetime, and companies know it. It's not worth it for them to double the number of servers just for that first week, so we get overcrowded, laggy servers for a few days. But in the long term, it all turns out fine. so you think it turned out fine for D3 when it lost 2/3rds of its player base shortly after release? it's all about the launch, sweetie. you might be able to connect just fine a month from now, but will anyone still be online to play with you? and you know, D3 was largely just having server problems. With SC2013, there is clearly something wrong not only with the servers, but the game itself. a disturbingly large chunk of players are losing their cities due to dysenc errors, and they're getting real tired with it. this game definitely will be in the running for worst launch of 2013.. sorry to break it to you but this is a disaster of epic proportions. hopefully EA and Maxis take this as a learning experience about what not to do.