Too Much Free Time

by Timothy Geigner

Filed Under:
gamer bill of rights, simcity


No, Sim City Debacle Doesn't Mean Gamers Need A Bill Of Rights

from the vote-with-your-dollar dept

Like any good debacle, this whole Sim City SNAFU breeds all manner of hostility. The reviews have begun to reflect the incredible amount of frustration at EA's mis-forecast of their launch-date readiness. Even retailers are poking the bear, so to speak, by offering reminders that past iterations of Sim City don't have the same problems and are still super fun to play. The calls for boycotts have been getting louder. But let's be careful not to slip into the land of the silly.

And by silly, I mean launching into a diatribe about how awfully the launch was handled by EA and then concluding that all gamers obviously need a wordily constructed Bill Of Rights. The explanation of what gamers shouldn't stand for isn't bad, actually.

We shouldn't only be upset that EA didn't have enough servers running for the game's launch. We should be upset that it was unnecessarily designed from the ground up to require an always-on online component. We should be upset that a series that has always been large and single-player has been made small and multiplayer with gamers having no choice in the matter. This wasn't an issue of not enough servers and poor planning. This was an issue of ignoring gamers' needs and wants in favor of a system that treats users as children and criminals.
Hell yes! I'm pissed off about it too, and I didn't even buy the damned game. I'm just angry by proxy, the use of which would likely cause a server connection error if I actually did try to play the game! What the hell, let's do something about, comrades! What's first? Storm EA's building and issue them stern looks and wagging fingers? Tweet at them with specific insults about their lineage? Wrap aging cheese up in tin foil and mail it to their offices as a kind of methodical stink bomb? C'mon!
Because of this, I offer the Gamers' Bill of Rights. It enumerates what we should expect from game developers, publishers, and retailers, and limits the unnecessary and offensive overuse of copy-protection measures. We should be able to expect a certain level of support for the games we buy, and we should feel safe in the fact that they won't violate our computers when we run them.
Yeah! That'll teach--wait, what? So...we're essentially going to tell game publishers what we want from them? Don't we...kind of do that already? Isn't that what buying their products is? Do we not have the option to boycott, to buy elsewhere, and all that? Hey, how long is this Bill Of Rights, anyway? 355 words!?!?

You know what, let me see if I can create my own gamer bill of rights that is just a single bullet point.

1. Gamers have the right not to give money to assholes

The end.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2013 @ 2:18pm

    Oh I don't know, isn't there room for people to be able to purchase something they do like without having to give permission for a whole lot of things they don't like.

    A warranty often starts off with the fact that despite everything they are about to offer, nothing about them affects your statutory rights, it says that because it has to, because nothing they say no matter how balanced and generous can supersede the manufacturer's legal liabilities.
    Wouldn't it be nice for games to offer us everything we want in a game without having to trade that off against giving up control or ownership of your game or your computer.
    The choice to buy or not buy is a bit crude and simplistic in the modern world where a canny company can run rings around you with conditions you've never read that can mean things you never thought of or could think of in relation to how it affects your life.
    A persons internet connection is there for their benefit, not for the benefit of a games manufacturer for example. You may have an always on connection but that doesn't give a games manufacturer a right to use it for their own purposes. Just as you may have a dvd player on your computer but games companies shouldn't expect or have any right to be able to use that to require that their dvd or cd is always in an accessible drive when that isn't necessary.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.