Please sign petition to protect us users from Server dependent Online games

[jobin007007 1]

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/institute-industry-wide-return-policy-video-games-rely-remote-servers-and-drm-function-properly/nMy1wrtC

 

Please check out the petition. The number of signees is very low.

 

If possible, please reply and say you signed so that this thread becomes hot like below:

 

 

Signed jobin007007

[Mootilda 76]

Must you be a U.S. citizen to sign this petition?

[Porter 68]

Moved this here, since it's really more of a generalized topic on gaming.

 

-Porter

[Mr Saturn64 742]

To the White House? You make good use of your First Amendment rights, but Mr President has more important things to handle...

[T Wrecks 10,209]

To the White House? You make good use of your First Amendment rights, ...

Well, to be honest I prefer this over people who make use of their Second Amendment rights.

[Mr Saturn64 742]

Considering the work "wreck" is in your username, that doesn't surprise me. 

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Huh? Care to elaborate? I'm afraid I don't quite get it.

[Jim14409 448]

I signed this petition back on March 10th.

Please remind our President that he does indeed have "more important" things to handle. Seems he keeps forgetting that. Anyway, he is not the only one in the Whitehouse and will never see this petition I'm almost certain. The petition is to "the Obama administration"

 

@Mootilda - I'm guessing one does have to be a U.S. citizen to sign the petition, but not sure. You could always try and sign-up I suppose. The worst that could happen is the Web Police would show up at your door...

[arcology 224]

Is there a way to list all the petitions for these kinds of changes. 

 

The one listed below is at 73,000+ signatures - this is kind of a huge topic for people. 

 

Electronic Arts Inc.: Remove "Always Online" DRM from SimCity and future games.

 

https://www.change.org/petitions/electronic-arts-inc-remove-always-online-drm-from-simcity-and-future-games

[Cockatoo 2,257]

Huh? Care to elaborate? I'm afraid I don't quite get it.

 

Hmm, no idea either. The work "wreck"?

 

Anyway, on the topic of this thread. I actually agree that the US government surely has more pressing problems to worry about than video games. I mean this really is the definition of a first world problem...

[SS3K 160]

I would have signed if it was for the truth to be told about area 51 but then again I aint american I'm english!

 

if this petition was for something like free heath care then I think the government would take it seriously enough to look at it.

[Evillions 552]

Like the above said, why would the U.S. government be concerned about video games?  I'm certain that they are more concerned about remedying the economy rather than reforming the video game industry.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

I guess the best protection against DRM games is a tightly closed wallet to begin with and some backbone to keep it that way.

[jobin007007 1]

To everybody, not the president wont see this, but you think he sees everything?

He has got people working  for him who look at this and take care of the business. 

Its like the CEO of your company. He doesn't see that your office is kept clean-the company just hire people to do it. 

The point is no one man can make a difference but collectively we all can.

Thanks.

[Mr Saturn64 742]

Huh? Care to elaborate? I'm afraid I don't quite get it.

Wreck=disaster

Whackos with guns, using 2nd Amdenment=disaster

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Yes, and I said that I prefer people who make intensive use of their First Amendment rights (freedom of speech, petition rights) over people who make intensive use of their Second Amendment rights (like turning their home into a gunshop & ammo depot and thinking that you're no man unless you carry a semi-automatic rilfe with infrared optics and grenade launcher around all the time). So we share exactly the same opinion.

[Hoipus 292]

Huh? Care to elaborate? I'm afraid I don't quite get it.

 

Hmm, no idea either. The work "wreck"?

 

Anyway, on the topic of this thread. I actually agree that the US government surely has more pressing problems to worry about than video games. I mean this really is the definition of a first world problem...

Always good to give consumers some more rights. First world or not, a problem is a problem, and problems that should be easy to fix may as well be fixed.

[Jim14409 448]

To everybody, not the president wont see this, but you think he sees everything?

He has got people working  for him who look at this and take care of the business. 

Its like the CEO of your company. He doesn't see that your office is kept clean-the company just hire people to do it. 

The point is no one man can make a difference but collectively we all can.

Thanks.

 

 

 

Huh? Care to elaborate? I'm afraid I don't quite get it.

 

Hmm, no idea either. The work "wreck"?

 

Anyway, on the topic of this thread. I actually agree that the US government surely has more pressing problems to worry about than video games. I mean this really is the definition of a first world problem...

Always good to give consumers some more rights. First world or not, a problem is a problem, and problems that should be easy to fix may as well be fixed.

 

More consumer rights is a good thing especially in this age where one right is handed out the front door and two are killed at the back door.

 

I think some people are forgetting or never realized that our Senators and Representatives are a part of our US Government. Everything marked Government does not come under the duty or direct responsibility of the President. For laws to be enacted or changed requires involvment of the Government in this country.

 

DRM needs fixing and one person cannot do the job it requires many people of like mind and purpose as Jobin suggested.

Yes, and I said that I prefer people who make intensive use of their First Amendment rights (freedom of speech, petition rights) over people who make intensive use of their Second Amendment rights (like turning their home into a gunshop & ammo depot and thinking that you're no man unless you carry a semi-automatic rilfe with infrared optics and grenade launcher around all the time). So we share exactly the same opinion.

It is a bit over much huh? One should leave the grenade launcher at home.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

It is a bit over much huh? One should leave the grenade launcher at home.

 

Come to think of it, yes. It is somewhat bulky after all.

[jobin007007 1]

I changed the title from 'DRM' to server dependent online games. Seems more apt.

Is there a way to list all the petitions for these kinds of changes. 

 

The one listed below is at 73,000+ signatures - this is kind of a huge topic for people. 

 

Electronic Arts Inc.: Remove "Always Online" DRM from SimCity and future games.

 

https://www.change.org/petitions/electronic-arts-inc-remove-always-online-drm-from-simcity-and-future-games

What happens here ? Does EA even have to react to this?

Like the above said, why would the U.S. government be concerned about video games?  I'm certain that they are more concerned about remedying the economy rather than reforming the video game industry.

Strength in numbers.. Government can only care about issues that affect more people or somebody rich/powerful is lobbying for the issue.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Instead of signing a dumb petition, how about you simply NOT BUY these games? I mean seriously, it was clearly advertised that you need a constant internet connection, so if you don't want to play a game that requires it, don't buy it. 

 

These petitions are meaningless. EA does not have to respond, and given the sales figures, people are stupid enough or generally don't care enough if a game requires a constant connection.

[Jim14409 448]

Instead of signing a dumb petition, how about you simply NOT BUY these games? I mean seriously, it was clearly advertised that you need a constant internet connection, so if you don't want to play a game that requires it, don't buy it. 

 

These petitions are meaningless. EA does not have to respond, and given the sales figures, people are stupid enough or generally don't care enough if a game requires a constant connection.

Not buying these games is an excellent suggestion and I for one do not buy them, nor will I ever. However why does it have to be an either or situation as you suggest? No, EA does not have to respond to any petition, nor does anyone else, but these companies know that the actual signers represent only a small percentage of like-minded potential customers. Those companies that are wise, want to foster a good name for themselves and good sales will take everything into consideration.

 

This fight needs to utililize every weapon available and I don't see the need to trivialize or mock any of them. So, Lexusinfernus, please go sign the "dumb petition."

[LexusInfernus 908]

Not buying these games is an excellent suggestion and I for one do not buy them, nor will I ever. However why does it have to be an either or situation as you suggest? No, EA does not have to respond to any petition, nor does anyone else, but these companies know that the actual signers represent only a small percentage of like-minded potential customers. Those companies that are wise, want to foster a good name for themselves and good sales will take everything into consideration.

 

 

 

This fight needs to utililize every weapon available and I don't see the need to trivialize or mock any of them. So, Lexusinfernus, please go sign the "dumb petition."

It is dumb because essentially it makes people sound like spoiled brats. You buy something knowing full well what the product was and then you start complaining that the product is terrible because you dislike an advertised feature. Well then you shouldn't have bought the freaking product. Compare it to buying World of Warcraft and then beginning a petition to Blizzard to include an offline mode for that as well.

 

Besides that, I doubt EA really cares at this point what people think of it. Everyone already fosters an irrational hate against everything EA does and nothing will change that anytime soon. And as long as they keep making a profit, they are going to continue doing exactly that what makes them that profit. Nothing speaks more clear to companies than disappointing sales figures. 

 

And I won't sign this petition because honestly I have no problem with the whole always online aspect. If I had a problem with it, I wouldn't have bothered spending my cash on this SimCity. 

[arcology 224]

Instead of signing a dumb petition, how about you simply NOT BUY these games? I mean seriously, it was clearly advertised that you need a constant internet connection, so if you don't want to play a game that requires it, don't buy it. 

 

These petitions are meaningless. EA does not have to respond, and given the sales figures, people are stupid enough or generally don't care enough if a game requires a constant connection.

Not buying these games is an excellent suggestion and I for one do not buy them, nor will I ever. However why does it have to be an either or situation as you suggest? No, EA does not have to respond to any petition, nor does anyone else, but these companies know that the actual signers represent only a small percentage of like-minded potential customers. Those companies that are wise, want to foster a good name for themselves and good sales will take everything into consideration.

 

This fight needs to utililize every weapon available and I don't see the need to trivialize or mock any of them. So, Lexusinfernus, please go sign the "dumb petition."

 

 

Agreed. 

 

I never did buy this newest version of SimCity and have have all the the old ones that I still continue to play, to this day.  I was hoping for an "updated" SC4 and still hold out some hope that someone out there will create what they know many want. 

 

I think corporations get too big and think that the customer is not always right - however, I don't think that the numbers on some of these petitions is something to laugh at. 

 

I think, in the future, more consumers' buying habits just may be affected by what has gone before. 

[arcology 224]

Instead of signing a dumb petition, how about you simply NOT BUY these games? I mean seriously, it was clearly advertised that you need a constant internet connection, so if you don't want to play a game that requires it, don't buy it. 

 

These petitions are meaningless. EA does not have to respond, and given the sales figures, people are stupid enough or generally don't care enough if a game requires a constant connection.

 

 

Petitions are not dumb.  They are actually a respectful way for many to voice the same opinion.  There have been actual changes made in this world, due to petitions.  Granted this is a game, however, many take the stand that playing games is a stress-reliever and in some instances, can be a creative outlet, depending on the type of game.

 

Surgeons have used video games to train for sharper hand-eye control,  http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/play-your-way-to-the-top-20090615-ccgj.html#ixzz25ZGWPpOH, and other "uses" for video games have been cited.  You can research this for yourself. 

 

Many haven't bought the game, however, many wanted to, as did I.  However, that doesn't mean, we can't let our voices be heard. 

[LexusInfernus 908]

Not all petitions are dumb, just this one. There are better ways of voicing your displeasure of the actions of a certain company, the most obvious being not buying their products. 

 

On top of that, one shouldn't be bothering the freaking federal government with this nonsense. 

[Jim14409 448]

Not all petitions are dumb, just this one. There are better ways of voicing your displeasure of the actions of a certain company, the most obvious being not buying their products. 

 

On top of that, one shouldn't be bothering the freaking federal government with this nonsense. 

You are entitled to your opinion and I think we all heard it but many of us still very much disagree with you on most points.

 

In your post you stated that "There are better ways of voicing your displeasure of the actions of a certain company..."

Could you please enlighten us as to what some of those ways might be? Thanks.

[LexusInfernus 908]

You are entitled to your opinion and I think we all heard it but many of us still very much disagree with you on most points.

 

 

 

In your post you stated that "There are better ways of voicing your displeasure of the actions of a certain company..."

Could you please enlighten us as to what some of those ways might be? Thanks.

Don't buy the game. There is nothing a company understands so well as disappointing sales figures. Add to that a lot of criticism from the community and EA should realize what went wrong and how they could prevent it in the future. 

 

Now you are sending a mixed message. At the one hand you bought the game while EA clearly communicated that it would be an always online game which implies that you were fine with the always online aspect but and now you are beginning a petition to the federal government asking them to protect you from always online DRM. You are responsible for whatever you buy, and if you buy a product you are not happy with, the fault lays with you. 

[NCGAIO 562]

But it is good to remember  on this subject that the untouchable John survived a fall of shares last year but did not survive the disastrous launch of the new game precisely for the negative repercussion of this and other actions.

 

And in my humble opinion yes is the federal government that should regulate such operations "lease" of sofware disguised in sale because contrary to what is said  are many casual consumers who complain about not knowing who could only play if EA authorize them

 

Just look at the advertisement of sale or system requirements to see how this information was hidden.

 

Ingenuity would expect  the own market to regulate this matter and  finally kill the goose that lays the golden eggs is not?

 

Imagine if it are true in the real world!

Ok! ... Here's your new car, but now that you bought paying attention to our regulations that you certainly did not read.

 

- You'll have to come get the keys here every time we want to use it

 

- If you come and we can not serve you please wait 20 minutes to try again and if you have not consiguir your key, just wait another twenty minutes to come back and back and back .....

 

- You can only replenishes it in our gas, alternative fuels are not allowed.

 

- Even if the car is in your home remember that he is not his but is only on loan then  you can not  sell it.

  

- If by chance we closed the dealership then we will solve if the key will be given to you or not.

 

I think that in such a case need not be the federal government but any small organ public would interfere

[LexusInfernus 908]

Except that it was clearly advertized that it would require a constant online connection to the EA servers. If you did not know about it, then it is your own fault for not doing your homework when you bought it. The government should not be there to save you from the consequences of your own ignorance. At least not when it comes to luxury products like games.