Maxis GM: Our Vision Is More Important Than Our Customers & Lots Of People Love Our Crappy DRM

from the so,-so-much-wrong dept

Well, it's been several hours, so obviously someone must have done something stupid over at the SimCity franchise. I could run through a long list of links from our coverage of this debacle, but I'll make it easy on you. The key links are the launch debacle, the backlash, and the evidence that all of this is wholly unnecessary. That last one is important because during the initial stages of this muck up, EA/Maxis came out hard, saying that offline modes were logistically impossible because of all the cloud-based resources needed to run the games simulation calculations. The evidence in the link proves rather conclusively that that is absolutely not the case. In that post, I had suggested that it was time for the game's producers to finally come out with a strong mea culpa. Here is that mea culpa, from Maxis GM Lucy Bradshaw:
So, could we have built a subset offline mode? Yes. But we rejected that idea because it didn't fit with our vision. We did not focus on the "single city in isolation" that we have delivered in past SimCities. We recognize that there are fans – people who love the original SimCity – who want that. But we're also hearing from thousands of people who are playing across regions, trading, communicating and loving the Always-Connected functionality. The SimCity we delivered captures the magic of its heritage but catches up with ever-improving technology.
Okay, so it isn't so much a mea culpa as a, "Hey, customers, why don't you go outside and play hide and go f@#$ yourself!" It's difficult to imagine a more tone deaf statement, given the circumstances. To essentially come out and say that you understand lots of people wanted an offline version of this game, and we already know you could have made one quite easily, but you rejected the idea of filling a customer need because it didn't match with your "vision"? I'd suggest that if this launch has been a faithful representation of your vision, it may be time to get idea-glasses.

And can I ask the other obvious question? Where the hell are all the people clamoring for online only mode? I have no doubt that there are folks who wanted and still want online components to the game, but who the hell is asking for a blatant limitation on their game? There's a major difference between offering online components and requiring it be online all the time. Personally, I think Bradshaw is reticulating our splines on that one.

On the other hand, when discussing the need for the servers in Bradshaw's blog post, there was one glaring omission: server resources/calculations. It appears the game's designers have finally decided to stop lying about why the servers in the cloud are needed and instead moved on to suggest that it's just a big part of their customers that are unnecessary instead.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    anonymouse, 18 Mar 2013 @ 6:19am

    Refunds

    I think it is time for the consumer rights groups to start demanding the right to get a refund after purchasing a game. If anything this shows the reason why we need a little more involvement by the law.
    One thing i am certain of is that if they had to by law give refunds none of this would have happened, and the game when released would have been properly tested and not just thrown out there with massive bugs that have been found, in fact the entire structure of the game is not as advertised.

    I think we need to start demanding that the law covers the right to a full refund within 7 days of purchasing a game, and if people start asking for refunds once they have completed the game too bad, the right to ask for a refund trumps their right to assume people are committing a crime.

    Seriously they cannot in any way assume people are going to buy the game play it to the end then ask for a refund, the law does not work that way, you have to prove someone has committed a crime before punishing them for said crime.

    Demand refunds on all games if they are not working as advertised, and nowhere on the game cover does it say clearly that it is an always online game or that the game cannot be saved across servers, or that the game does not allow the features advertised by EA.Or that you could lose all your work if a server has an update applied to it.

    And i for one don't care what damage this does to the market, if the developers ignore the consumers then they need to leave the market to those that don't.

    One thing i think we can all feel good about is that EA is going to lose a lot of money with so many people not buying the game and hopefully not as many buying the DLC as they anticipated.

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
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

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