EA Refuse to Refund SimCity - Possible account ban if you take action

[cotyboy]

Is there a working crack already?

 

[ForteGospel]

Is there a working crack already?

chances are there won't be... unless someone pirates a server...

 

[Bladexdsl]

oh well fuck it up next for me bioshock 3 you disappointed the shit out me EA ONCE AGAIN!

 

[retKHAAAN]

Because you're scared of change, and the idea of having to do any more setup than "insert CD and hit play" strikes fear into your heart?

Consoles get bad shit too, the answer is always to check out a game before you buy it.

Scared of change? joodoneevinnomehomie...
It's possible I don't care about BetterDealsForGamesI'llNeverGetAroundToPlaying or MadGraphixYo!
Or maybe I don't want to pay $300+ for a PC that can handle the games I want to play when my console I paid 1/2 as much for handles them just fine.

because you'll accept inferiority for convenience?

/just answering the question honestly

I'm curious as to how consoles are inferior.
If your answer is:
- Better Graphics
- Games so cheap you can build up a backlog you'll never play
- 60FPS
...no need to bother replying.

 

[Rydian]

you didnt answered my question though, does the game still has single player or have they changed to a kind of "mmo", because thats what happened to diablo 3...

Diablo III went online-saves-only partially to combat cheating (see this for some comparison info). Sim City, from what I understand, doesn't need anything like that, but is always-online anyways as a form of DRM.

The fact that most people are having trouble playing the game because the servers keep going down when the servers aren't even a requirement for any other game in the series is just a kick in the balls too.

So this is DRM that's stopping a large percentage of paying customers from actually playing. Which is bad.

Also, many other games had a rough start

The problem is this isn't required. Most games you play do not have always-on DRM and would not run into this type of issue. This is caused purely by the DRM.

but a week from now, this problem should cease to ever exist again.

The fact that it's here in the first place is wrong.

You might be fine with letting them rip you off, but most people aren't.

chances are there won't be... unless someone pirates a server...

Happened for Assassin's Creed IIRC. The server feeds critical resources to the game, so somebody just logged the resources in transmission, whipped up a little script for Apache to send the right responses, then bundled it so pirates could run their own local server.

~

• Far better graphics are possible.
  
  
• You can play tens of thousands of games that will never reach whatever console you have.
  
  
• You can play pre-release versions of games.
  
  
• If you want, you can even make your own for free, and give it to whoever wants it, for free.
  
  
• You can run whatever sort of additional software you want, PCs have been multi-tasking since far before the first console.
  
  
• You can mod the games. Some games have been played for years after their initial time only thanks to mods being made.
  
  
• Alternate and configurable control schemes. Use tons of different controllers (even console ones) in addition to mice, trackballs, etc.
  
  
• You can access all sorts of services (voice in game, messaging, etc.) without it being officially supported by the console first.
  
  
• You can record and edit your gameplay without additional hardware.
  
  
• You can stream your gameplay without additional hardware.
  
  
• Unless it requires a third-party server (MMO-style), online play is free (yes this is an easy-as-hell jab at Xbox Live).
  
  
• Cheats are possible without specific hardware needing to be developed and licensed, as it can be done in software.
  
  
• And for older games, the most powerful emulation you can get, without needing somebody to release a hack, and without compromising your ability to access the latest games.

But sure, go on and continue being scared and lazy. Was it you (before the name change) that was bitching that you needed to install a game from disc before you could play it?

 

[DSGamer64]

But everyone knows that gaming would be better with only one publisher, one console maker, and one distributor. Right? Because that works for every other industry! Monopolies are good!

Yes, because PC gaming was so bad off with Steam as the most widely adopted digital game distribution service on the market, which in itself was a monopoly right?

And no, having one console is a bad idea, having multiple consoles that are all the exact same experience is a bad idea.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Yes, because PC gaming was so bad off with Steam as the most widely adopted digital game distribution service on the market, which in itself was a monopoly right?

And no, having one console is a bad idea, having multiple consoles that are all the exact same experience is a bad idea.

No two consoles have had the same experience.

And with Origin as competition, it means better experiences for customers. Steam introduces a new feature, Origin tries to match it. Origin puts a game's price cheaper, Steam tries to match it.

One of the basic principles of business is that competition is good for the customer.

 

[DSGamer64]

No two consoles have had the same experience.

And with Origin as competition, it means better experiences for customers. Steam introduces a new feature, Origin tries to match it. Origin puts a game's price cheaper, Steam tries to match it.

One of the basic principles of business is that competition is good for the customer.

I'd argue that at the core, the PS3 and 360 offer the exact same gaming experience, multiple titles are available on both platforms. When it comes to what matters, and that is games, the PS3 and 360 are almost identical in terms of offerings.

EA is hardly doing any competing. They don't have the indie scene support that Steam has, Valve has GreenLight which is allowing for a lot of new titles to constantly be published. If EA were actually trying to compete with Valve, most game prices would be lower on both platforms, or many of the games available on Steam would also be on Origin, but neither of those things are true.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I'd argue that at the core, the PS3 and 360 offer the exact same gaming experience, multiple titles are available on both platforms. When it comes to what matters, and that is games, the PS3 and 360 are almost identical in terms of offerings.

EA is hardly doing any competing. They don't have the indie scene support that Steam has, Valve has GreenLight which is allowing for a lot of new titles to constantly be published. If EA were actually trying to compete with Valve, most game prices would be lower on both platforms, or many of the games available on Steam would also be on Origin, but neither of those things are true.

So a few multiplats and they're the same gaming experience? Let's not count different features, different infrastructures (both hardware and online), and different games. Hell one's got the Move, one's got the Kinect. That's a big difference right here.

EA competes because their big titles come to Origin. Like Mass Effect 3, Battlefield 3 (and the upcoming Battlefield 4), etc.

Steam definitely is dominant in the market but providing some competition is healthy. Wanting Origin to die purely out of spite and some misguided notion that EA is worse than Hitler is both bad for the customer and just a severe misunderstanding of business.

 

[Rydian]

The 360 and PS3 tend to have the same types of games and such because they have the same target audience (that good ol' 14-19 or whatever everybody on earth targets). As Guild said, the way they go about their goals is different.

 

[retKHAAAN]

• Far better graphics are possible.
  
• You can play tens of thousands of games that will never reach whatever console you have.
  
• You can play pre-release versions of games.
  
• If you want, you can even make your own for free, and give it to whoever wants it, for free.
  
• You can run whatever sort of additional software you want, PCs have been multi-tasking since far before the first console.
  
• You can mod the games. Some games have been played for years after their initial time only thanks to mods being made.
  
• Alternate and configurable control schemes. Use tons of different controllers (even console ones) in addition to mice, trackballs, etc.
  
• You can access all sorts of services (voice in game, messaging, etc.) without it being officially supported by the console first.
  
• You can record and edit your gameplay without additional hardware.
  
• You can stream your gameplay without additional hardware.
  
• Unless it requires a third-party server (MMO-style), online play is free (yes this is an easy-as-hell jab at Xbox Live).
  
• Cheats are possible without specific hardware needing to be developed and licensed, as it can be done in software.
  
• And for older games, the most powerful emulation you can get, without needing somebody to release a hack, and without compromising your ability to access the latest games.

But sure, go on and continue being scared and lazy. Was it you (before the name change) that was bitching that you needed to install a game from disc before you could play it?

So I'll preface my response to your bullet-points with "video games take up about 1.5% of my time"

Spoiler

• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care

The correlation between scared/lazy gamers and console gamers is not as tight as you seem to think... Some people really just don't care and game to escape for a short while. I suppose I'd be a scared and lazy driver for not owning a Ferrari too, right? My Honda Civic gets me where I need to go, thanks.

As far as bitching about installing a game from disc before playing it? You'll have to link me to that one... I install all my games. The only time I've even commented with anything even remotely resembling negative was when some numbnut here was claiming Rage needed all 3 discs installed in order to play (which was bullshit) and I only had a 20GB harddrive at the time (each disc was 7GB).

 

[jalaneme]

hopefully EA do more micro transactions in their games and it makes them completely bankrupt, hurry up EA make another way to fuck over your customers! i want to see you dead as a company, they are the worst gaming company in history.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

hopefully EA do more micro transactions in their games and it makes them completely bankrupt, hurry up EA make another way to fuck over your customers! i want to see you dead as a company, they are the worst gaming company in history.

Fuck the jobs of thousands of people and the customers who do enjoy EA games (like the millions who buy Battlefield and do like it), I've got a high horse to ride!

 

[ShadowSoldier]

hopefully EA do more micro transactions in their games and it makes them completely bankrupt, hurry up EA make another way to fuck over your customers! i want to see you dead as a company, they are the worst gaming company in history.

No they aren't, shut up.

 

[retKHAAAN]

hopefully EA do more micro transactions in their games and it makes them completely bankrupt, hurry up EA make another way to fuck over your customers! i want to see you dead as a company, they are the worst gaming company in history.

I can't help but imagine a 13 year old with pale, pale skin and the ever so slight crusting of mucus around each nostril when I read posts like these...

 

[Rydian]

So I'll preface my response to your bullet-points with "video games take up about 1.5% of my time"

Spoiler

• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care
• Don't care

Could apply to consoles too.

Why have such a strong stance on the matter if you don't care? (Hint: you do care enough to automatically reject anybody trying to dissuade you from your current opinion.)

The correlation between scared/lazy gamers and console gamers is not as tight as you seem to think... Some people really just don't care and game to escape for a short while.

I wasn't talking about console users in general (ease of use for a more limited experience is still ease of use).

I suppose I'd be a scared and lazy driver for not owning a Ferrari too, right?

lolno, nice try though. PC gaming is affordable to the average person (a Ferrari is specifically noted as not.)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883227448
$479, $120 less than the price the PS3 came out at, and will play future games for a while.
(Just a quick prebuilt example, if you want actual suggestions that's better for another thread.)

"But consoles get cheaper over time" - Because the hardware they're using gets older. Same with PCs. That PC has way more modern parts than the PS3, for example. I could find you a cheaper/used one along the level of the PS3, but even theoretically you'd be much happier with newer parts than older ones.

My Honda Civic gets me where I need to go, thanks.

And my computer does what I need it to, while a console doesn't... and my computer does more that I enjoy as well, such as letting me mod games and multi-task, record gameplay and tweaks, etc.

It's fine if you don't want to do that stuff, but don't try to pretend none of the advantages exist when you directly ask for them. XD

As far as bitching about installing a game from disc before playing it? You'll have to link me to that one... I install all my games. The only time I've even commented with anything even remotely resembling negative was when some numbnut here was claiming Rage needed all 3 discs installed in order to play (which was bullshit) and I only had a 20GB harddrive at the time (each disc was 7GB).

The thread was about the PC, somebody was complaining that they needed to install a game from a disc on the PC and couldn't just run it immediately like on older consoles.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

If you play games casually (i.e. not a whole lot because, y'know, you have a life), a console is perfect. It's cheaper, it's streamlined, and it works well for multimedia too.

Like there's some PC games I'd like to play but I'd more so upgrade to a better PC for 1) video production and 2) to play with my friends.

I wouldn't say PCs are better than consoles since they all have their pros and cons.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

If you play games casually (i.e. not a whole lot because, y'know, you have a life), a console is perfect. It's cheaper, it's streamlined, and it works well for multimedia too.

Like there's some PC games I'd like to play but I'd more so upgrade to a better PC for 1) video production and 2) to play with my friends.

I wouldn't say PCs are better than consoles since they all have their pros and cons.

 

[DSGamer64]

So a few multiplats and they're the same gaming experience? Let's not count different features, different infrastructures (both hardware and online), and different games. Hell one's got the Move, one's got the Kinect. That's a big difference right here.

EA competes because their big titles come to Origin. Like Mass Effect 3, Battlefield 3 (and the upcoming Battlefield 4), etc.

Steam definitely is dominant in the market but providing some competition is healthy. Wanting Origin to die purely out of spite and some misguided notion that EA is worse than Hitler is both bad for the customer and just a severe misunderstanding of business.

Sure, Origin is getting EA's games, but they aren't getting a whole lot else, and whatever else comes to Origin, will already be on Steam aside from EA games since other developers have the brains to recognize that the wider your sales base, the more copies of your product you can sell. When you, as a company, go out of your way to pull games from one service because you dislike having to pay to have the updates hosted, that shows you are a complete dickweed of a company who doesn't care about marketability and appeasing your customers. The last EA game I bought on Steam was Battlefield: Bad Company 2, I am still mad that they refused to release anything after that on Steam aside from Mass Effect 2 I think, and that also includes Mass Effect 3 which I wanted to play. There are many PC gamer's like myself who refuse to buy into Origin because of EA's atrocious business ethics, so as much as they want to save money, they are losing customer support and potential buys by limiting their games on PC to using and requiring Origin to play.

 

[the_randomizer]

So a few multiplats and they're the same gaming experience? Let's not count different features, different infrastructures (both hardware and online), and different games. Hell one's got the Move, one's got the Kinect. That's a big difference right here.

EA competes because their big titles come to Origin. Like Mass Effect 3, Battlefield 3 (and the upcoming Battlefield 4), etc.

Steam definitely is dominant in the market but providing some competition is healthy. Wanting Origin to die purely out of spite and some misguided notion that EA is worse than Hitler is both bad for the customer and just a severe misunderstanding of business.

EA still has dick policies nonetheless, despite making huge financial successes. The very fact they refuse to refund paying customers is absurd. And yet they sit around wondering why piracy is rampant.