This could be a very big moment. EA is selling a completely broken product - and I mean that from the perspective of the average consumer, not the nerd who thinks all DRM is broken - and they're doing it for <i>absolutely no reason</i>. If this lasts long enough and gets enough press, it could actually be a turning point against DRM like this.<p>That would be so wonderful.
I feel bad for the game devs who got to see their hard work turn into something they don't intend.<p>I suppose this is a great advertising technique for small firms, startups, indie shops, etc. "Don't want this[<a href="http://amazon-pulls-sim-city" rel="nofollow">http://amazon-pulls-sim-city</a>] to happen? Work for our small team. We won't destroy your work."<p>I know it's standard to say "you get a part in the decisionmaking process!" That's part of it. But a lot of people are willing to let go of the big decisions if they get to be a part of something great. But they have to trust that it will come out well in the end.
EA needs to pivot this game, fast.<p>Even in the best case scenario, where the servers all get fixed <i>this evening</i> and the game works flawlessly for everyone for a month straight, the damage to the game's name has been done. The meme is hatched: SimCity 2013 has a highly brittle dependency on poorly-planned cloud infrastructure.<p>There's a private region mode in the game (that you nonetheless can't use offline in the current architecture). EA needs to have Maxis crunch for the next couple of weeks to make this work offline. Yes, I've read the nebulous quotes about "part of the sim happening in the cloud." Whatever that is, they'll have to move it to the client.<p>Once offline play is possible, if EA wants any chance to make back its investment on this game, they're going to have to first promote the new offline mode, and then spend the next couple of months doing some post-launch rescoping of the multiplayer aspect. They can still make it work; it could still be fantastic – but they have to move fast.
Can we talk about this more clearly?<p>This isn't strictly "evil DRM" as people are highlighting.<p>Unlike some other games, it's not like SimCity is just phoning home to figure out if it is licensed or not, and preventing unlicensed copies.<p>SimCity depends on EA/Maxis' server infrastructure for a great deal of storage and computation related to the macro-scale components of each game. Not only is city state synced there and shared between players, but regional dynamics and macro-scale economic systems are continuously maintained in the EA cloud. There's plenty of other features that are done server-side, and in total they represent a substantial piece of this game.<p>We can argue about whether these things should be computed and stored in the cloud, but I think there is a plausible, if imperfect, argument for doing so; Many players are involved and system resources are scarce relative to simulation complexity.<p>Regardless, the use of the cloud in this game is for more than just to deter pirates. That much is clear. And it's also clear that EA cannot "simply remove the DRM" and expect people to have a full offline experience; this is a primarily multiplayer game.<p>Indeed, this seems part of a trend in the games industry--that of bringing MMO(massively multiplayer online) experiences to more games. Call it social or something else, more games are working to get people to play with others. It's good business and actually creates some special experiences.<p>In any case, EA/Maxis have clearly not executed the launch for SimCity well. With 10 years of pent-up demand, it would have been wise to provision more server side resources to keep the experience good. It's hard to keep up with so many users, and perhaps a longer beta period would have helped.<p>But as a SimCity player and vet, I'll say that stripping out the online piece of this game doesn't make sense, and that piece was certainly designed for the benefit of gamers.<p>It's not strictly DRM or EA milking their customers.
The fundamental problem with Sim City is that it is historically a single-player, offline experience. And it didn't help that this is the first true Sim City we've seen since 2003 (Sim City 4) and many media hyped this game to be possibly the best Sim City yet, and the most realistic city simulation experience.<p>Yes, there may be technical limitations that required processing to happen on EA servers. And yes, they make it clear on the front of the box that an internet connection is required to play the game.[1]<p>But most people purchasing this game expected that for the most part, this would be primarily a single player just like the previous titles, and that the internet connection is only required for DRM and/or occasional online interaction. They don't realize that a lot of the engine lives in the cloud.<p>So there is a different level of disappointment because of the expectations that were there. If this had been a follow-up to an MMO, they would have known that the game heavily depended on server performance, and it may have been a little more forgivable.<p>But most people don't understand why the game doesn't work. "Just disable DRM for now. Or disable multiplayer interactions. Make it offline only for now."<p>What I can't believe is that this isn't just minor hiccups with the launch -- this is catastrophic failure. Why couldn't better load testing simulate and predict what they're seeing today?<p>Regardless, as many have said, this will ruin the name of Sim City, at least for a period, and will cause even more bitterness with EA than what already exists.<p>[1]<a href="http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/815mDnNUDhL._SL1121_.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/815mDnNUDhL._SL1121_.j...</a>
As a game author I am very ashamed of what the industry has been doing in the last few years.<p>It started with FPS mania...
Then crazy DRM that destroyed your PC (Starforce I am looking to you).<p>Then... more crazy DRM! (SecuROM, that for example refused to launch Spore on dual-GPU laptops).<p>Then online only DRM...<p>Then DLC mania (Horse Armor, I am looking to you... unfortunately as the harbinger of something much worse past you).<p>Then Diablo III (and now SC5) managed to be the first games I don't want to play even borrowed, pirated or given to me. If someone give me a DIII CD, I won't even re-sell it and inflict something evil on someone, I will just throw it on the trash, because online-only DRM for Single Player game, transforming the game into a sort of cloud-based service, is one of the most evil things that companies could invent, specially because they can just yank the game from you when they wish (also you cannot have fun cheating alone or modding, cannot play when you are deployed in some war without internet on the HQ or live in the third world, cannot play if you deride EA/Activision/Ubisoft on the forums and they decide to ban you...)
The title of the 5-star review Amazon highlighted as the helpful is delightful: "Got me off my video game addiction!"<p>If there isn't some kind of anti-DRM movement surrounding these review this game might break some kind of record for worst reviews. As of now there are 737 1-star reviews.
The dev team did an IAMA on Reddit a few months ago, where this was all foreshadowed:<p><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/14v8er/drama_in_riama_maxis_video_game_developers_run_an/" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/14v8er/drama...</a>
When a game requires an internet connection to work we call it DRM and slam it. When a text editor or spreadsheet requires an internet connection to run we call it innovation.
EA is offering refunds but only in some cases, with a very haphazard criteria:
<a href="http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18gs2vgs50fjijpg/original.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18gs2vgs50fjijpg/original.jp...</a>
I was initially apprehensive about the server-based architecture of the game. However, after playing it for a few hours and being pleasantly surprised, I can now see why they did it. There's a concepts of multiplayer regions with cities that contact each other, and it's more than simply visiting the city.<p>It's a full economic simulation in which you can sell excess electricity supplies to other cities, lend them public services such as police or fire protection, build mass transit like commuter rail between cities, etc. Long story short, I was surprised to find that there are a lot of features that legitimately need a server. I initially expected the server-based system to be purely for the purposes of DRM, but anyone playing it can probably determine that it's a bit more than that.<p>Now if they can wrinkle out the bugs and get the servers running (which is, don't get me wrong, a huge huge <i>huge</i> issue right now), I'll be happy.
I don't understand why people buy games from EA? I mean, seriously, why buy it?<p>They have been pulling this crap for years and each new release just gets progressively worse.<p>About a year ago I decided if it's not on Steam I'm not buying it. It really sucks to miss out on some of the games, but I refuse to support such an asshole of a company.
I'm going to disagree slightly.<p>The primary "DRM" in this game is not DRM in the sense of something that attempts to control your computer in such a way as you can not make copies or run an unauthorised version.<p>The DRM here is about moving game logic to a server under EA's control. I think this is the correct way to do DRM in that it works and does not require locked down client platforms or invasive rootkits.<p>I would much prefer to pay for something as a service than have some third party try and take control of my computer. After all, people don't complain about 37 signals , google or World of warcraft for their business models which essentially amount to the same sort of "DRM".<p>The issues here seem to be that:<p>EA didn't plan for the demand and make sure that enough servers were available.<p>Since there is no monthly service fee, there will come a point at which it is no longer economical for EA to run the servers. This will make the game unplayable unless there is some plan by which they will release the server software for download after X years.<p>There are certain expectations built around the SimCity brand, mainly that the games have high and timeless replayability and that they can be played in isolation. I wonder if the game had been named "Simcity online" would have changed the reception?
"Guess what? If you'd love to experience the nonstop thrills and excitement of SimCity, then please remove $60 from your bank and promptly pay someone to kick you repeatedly in the friggin' mouth." - Ouch! Once again EA fucks up another great gaming franchise that could have made them a lot of money by implementing DRM that doesn't work. I know Blizzard did this with Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2, but at least their servers could handle the load...<p>Not surprised. EA is a failure of a company being run into the ground by greedy and paranoid CEO's who essentially treat their customers like criminals. I feel sorry for the developers who obviously did an amazing job, the new Simcity seems like a well-built game with smart AI developed by no doubt some of the smartest minds in development, such a shame most people will never get a chance to play the game before demanding refunds.<p>The uninformed will blame the developers but it's the fault of EA itself, not the developers who did an amazing job. I want to play this game, but I'm going to download the cracked version when it's released instead because it'll actually work.
Where's Steve Jobs when you need him?<p>> Steve Jobs summoned the MobileMe team to the Town Hall
> auditorium on Apple’s Cupertino campus for an obscenity-
> laden dressing down. ‘You’ve tarnished Apple’s reputation,’
> he told them. ‘You should hate each other for having let
> each other down.’ Then he named a new executive on the spot
> to run the team.”<p><a href="http://macdailynews.com/2011/05/08/steve-jobs-to-those-responsible-for-mobilemess-you-should-hate-each-other/#Gb5gk9Qr5v3TWy0M.99" rel="nofollow">http://macdailynews.com/2011/05/08/steve-jobs-to-those-respo...</a>
Amazon is still selling the physical version. Why would they pull the digital download and not the physical copy? Is it because there are different people responsible for it?
Overall, this games seems like a good example of how not to launch a product:<p><a href="http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/simcity" rel="nofollow">http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/simcity</a><p>Fanboy perspective:
<a href="http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/simcity-impressions-we-waited-ten-years-for-this/" rel="nofollow">http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/03/simcity-impressions-we...</a>
Seriously, how is this legal? They're obviously very open about it requiring online, and the extent to which the servers are involved, and the fact you need Origin.<p>However, this isn't some cheap game, some small company, some inexperienced producers who didn't know what to expect. That their servers aren't up to the job is inexcusable, and clearly their fault.<p>Even if Origin has Ts & Cs that boil down to you don't actually have the right to play games you buy, even if you buy them on a disc - which I'm sure they do, how is this possibly legal? The game is unplayable, it's their fault and they could have made it work if they'd chosen to.
Three things<p>1) remove the online DRM
2) significantly expand the size of the ridiculously small city area (let users push the bounds of their system by choosing how big of a city to work on)
3) enable a save/load to go with the offline mode<p>Do it as fast as possible. And then suck up to users by providing some free DLC here and there.<p>Anyone taking bets that EA will do the opposite of these obvious steps?
I wish I had read about this before I bought the game. I feel screwed over, I would have never bought the game if I knew it was like this.<p>There's something the game industry doesn't get in their zeal for control over users. (And lets be clear, this is about control, not just about piracy.) Here's what the game industry doesn't get: your barrier to entry is already exceptionally high. You might be able to get away with this in the short term, but it's a bad long term proposition, because I'm almost always going to choose convenience over quality (and I'm not alone). Asking me to pay $60, wait for a 12GB download, and have a very powerful rig is already a huge stretch. When you factor this mess in it's just not worth my time. I'd rather go get an indie game, or play a flash game. It's just not worth my time to deal with this, even if the game itself is impressive.
I can only speculate the designers said "Oh man, if we can interact with each other's city that'd be awesome" and someone higher up said "It'll always be on!"<p>Everyone saw this coming. Everyone. I don't understand how they couldn't prepare better?
After the Tetris debacle[1] on iOS and putting obtrusive adverts into their iOS games for new ones despite me paying for them (a cardinal sin IMHO) combined with endless DRM debacles and horror stories about how employees were treated, I took the decision to never buy or install another EA game again.<p>Electronic Arts (which EA is the mutated-gollum-like growth of) was actually a software developer that was based on the idea of the developers being artists. They shared lavish profits with them, put the developers' faces on boxes and made some amazing games. If you want to see some highlights of Electronic Arts' back catalogue, take a look at these:<p>* M.U.L.E - <a href="http://www.worldofmule.net/tiki-index.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.worldofmule.net/tiki-index.php</a><p>* Desert Strike - <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/desert-strike-return-to-the-gulf" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobygames.com/game/desert-strike-return-to-the-gu...</a><p>* Populous - <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/populous" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobygames.com/game/populous</a><p>* The Bard's Tale - <a href="http://bardstale.poverellomedia.com/" rel="nofollow">http://bardstale.poverellomedia.com/</a><p>* F/A-18 Interceptor - <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/fa-18-interceptor" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobygames.com/game/fa-18-interceptor</a><p>* Indy 500 - <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/indianapolis-500-the-simulation" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobygames.com/game/indianapolis-500-the-simulatio...</a><p>* Road Rash - <a href="http://www.mobygames.com/game/road-rash" rel="nofollow">http://www.mobygames.com/game/road-rash</a><p>A lot (but not all) of these were games developed when Trip Hawkins was in charge. Trip Hawkins went on to found the failed 3DO console, which is where a lot of the modern 3D versions of the popular franchises (NFS, FIFA etc.) first started out.<p>If you don't like DRM, being nickel and dimed, or scummy company practices. I highly recommend you boycott EA and spend your money on the plenty of City building alternatives on Steam[2] instead.<p>[1] - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetris_(mobile_video_game)#App_Store_removal/" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetris_(mobile_video_game)#App_...</a><p>[2] - <a href="http://store.steampowered.com/" rel="nofollow">http://store.steampowered.com/</a>
The servers being down, I can <i>almost</i> forgive, but this whole affair with the DRM is very puzzling. EA has a history of angering users who buy their games. And yet, for apparently no good reason, they have incorporated into their latest offering the one element that is guaranteed to anger virtually everyone who buys their game.<p>It's pretty simple - I paid money for your game. Now, I own it. EA, maybe you need a tutorial on how money works. Let's not get side-tracked and start talking about whether or not I own my songs on iTunes or any of these more entrenched markets. If I buy a video game, I should be able to play it 10 years later, even if the EA Sim City Servers are long-gone and now devoted to keeping track of whatever the latest terrible incarnation of Madden does.<p>I didn't buy Civ V (not EA) because of DRM. I haven't bought other games because of DRM. I wanted to buy into the Sim City franchise again but I'm not buying Sim City V because of DRM. You just lost a sale and likely a future customer.
It's been fun while I've actually been able to connect to EA's servers. (which is rare). I'm not going to beat the anti-drm drum, but I will say this. If EA is going to go this route they had better have the resources available to make it happen. I for one actually don't mind it, if it was able to work.
I'm not sure if this will work but there's a petition for EA to remove the server requirement...
<a href="http://www.change.org/petitions/electronic-arts-inc-remove-always-online-drm-from-simcity-and-future-games" rel="nofollow">http://www.change.org/petitions/electronic-arts-inc-remove-a...</a>
I am waiting to see what comes of this before I buy. However, They had overloaded server issues during the 1 hour beta AND the extended 4 hour beta leading up to the launch.<p>Hoping they can get this resolved quickly. I think we're dreaming if the fix will involve a non-DRM offline mode.
I haven't been paying much attention to SCV except that it seemed to be generating a lot of hype and excitement...so I'm kind of confused why the game has to be so intricately tied into whatever (apparently faulty) online service that EA has setup.<p>I mean, besides the DRM. I don't get why my fake city has to be attached to a world of fake cities if all I want to do is play in the sandbox. Didn't the designers/executives consider that many people would be perfectly fine playing alone? And then slowly rolling out the multiplayer features?<p>I doubt we'll see it, but it'd be great to see a post-mortem of the actual bug. Was it load-related or just something extremely boneheaded?
I really, really wanted to buy this game. Since I was young I've always loved the SimCity series and was hoping this would be great... I was even going to buy a new PC just to play it.<p>Fuck you EA - you're disappointing my inner child!
Most single-player games that have an multi-player or online component also have an offline mode for single-player use.<p>This game should have been a combination of a basic single-player mode (campaign style, maybe with goals to accomplish, etc) in addition to a multi-player mode that would allow for online play with other cities.<p>At least with a single-player mode you know there is a part of the game you'll always be able to play, long after the online components have been discontinued.<p>Conceptually, the online mode sounds pretty intriguing but, obviously, was poorly executed.
The programmers will probably be thrown under the bus for this instead of the suits who dictated the game's stupid social direction and always-on DRM, but I'm glad that this game is so far looking like an epic failure. Gaming companies need to be punished in the marketplace for rampant stupidity.<p>They deserve this game to flop, and it's good for gaming as a whole if this is an epic failure so EA will learn a lesson.<p>(Though I have doubts that a company as thick-headed as EA will learn anything positive from this)
My copy is on its way in the mail. I'm a huge SimCity fanatic and was slightly worried that when it got here I'd sink too much time in it and get behind on my work.<p>Thanks EA!
NO Longer Valid - Amazon smartened up (in terms of running a profit making business) and decided to resell the game, its the number 1 seller now after all
Here's a thought: if you can't get your act together with servers during a launch, stagger the launch. IE, when you buy your game, you have a place in a queue, and when there is enough server capacity to support you, you are let into the system. That way, you can change gamers expectations such that they are being let into an exclusive party, not that the game that they purchased is defective.
To me, the problems we see today will pale in comparison with the problems people will experience years from now. If the game is unplayable today, what will it be like when EA decides that keeping the servers running is unprofitable, and turns those servers off?<p>(I think there's some sort of analog to historical preservation of art and buildings here.)
I have played the last couple nights (since release) on the West Europe 2 server though I'm on the East Coast. Not ideal I guess but I've had to do the same thing for other games. Hopefully it still works when I get home in a few hours :)<p>Speaking of "broken" memes.<p>I used to play SimCity like you, until it got an arrow in the cloud. Improve on that please.
Reading the comments below it sounds like there is an infrastructure scaling issue going on down at EA (I'm no DRM specialist).<p>If that is indeed the case:
Methinks the AWS sales guy/gal on the EA account has just been handed the easiest ROI they could ask for. "Buy my cloud, and we will be able to start selling your game again."
I was thinking of buying this, but meh, never mind.<p>(may as well just wait for the cracked version and enjoy the game with more convenience)<p><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/simcity" rel="nofollow">http://www.reddit.com/r/simcity</a> seems to be summing up the problem pretty nicely with some clever use of the curved roads.
I have been amazed at the interest level in this game. I shared in the excitement and could not wait for the Mac version. Now the bad backlash, bugs, and generally horrific reviews have significantly deflated my interest. Gaming startups - make a better one!! ;)
Short of asking for a refund, and not buying the game in the first place, who at Maxis and EA can customers write/call/etc to let them know what I feel about the business decision to force online only DRM?
I still see "buy and download" button and it says "Available". It has a warning about connectivity problems but the game seems to be still available for sale.
Not really game issues (though they definitely seem to exist as well, unstable games is just par for the course these days), broken DRM and server issues.
The brain-dead corporate douches in gray suits pulled the trendy social bullshit into the legendary single-player game and ruined it. That's unbelievable!
I think the real reason Amazon stopped selling it was the Amazon Buyers looked at the game and said: "What? No subways? Small City Size? We can't sell this!"