EA stops online passes and my long rant.. (Not about EA)

[The-Traveling-Bard]

Too be honest Online Passes are kinda of a good thing in same cases. Diablo 3, Sim City etc. Are fucking bullshit because NONE OF THOSE GAMES REALLY NEED A CONSTANT CONNECTION. Also the "features that require constant connection." is quite a bullshit excuse. What in God's name are you creating that requires a constant connection. Seriously WHAT FEATURE REQUIRES A CONSTANT CONNECTION. TELL ME EA TELL ME. Even still if they can answer that I will promptly probably say. "I don't give a shit about that." because I am sure it's some form of social media gimmick that's pointless. Which social media gimmicks and motion control gimmicks are already choking the industry to death. (Or pointless multiplayer that was probably tacked on at the end.)

Anyways I would think that constant online probably would mean a tighter security around hackers/botters. (Anyone can correct me if I am wrong. I'm just guessing here.)

Seriously... Opening speech from Sony CEO (At least I think it was the CEO) "We want to let people know that the PS4 is just more than shooting people in the head." WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK. That's ALL the ps4 should be is shooting people in the head or other equally fun violent behaviors that I can't do in real life but wish I could because I hear that 20 years are getting couples counseling. (THEY'RE FUCKING 20...).

This pointless gimmick shit is really killing the industry since they FORCE companies into making their console gimmicks into their game, since each console is different that will mean they would to develop on average 2-3 different fucking gimmicks for each different console. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME. What a waste of time that the average gamer doesn't give a flying fuck about. Also what a waste of thousands of dollars if not hundreds that could be going into paying employees or making the game better.

Even though Triple A games are already being made with 50+ million dollars invested them. ( I would like to know honestly where all this money goes. Because.. I have yet to see a game that felt like a lot of money was used into making it and was actually put to good use since most average triple A games are like 5-6 hours long..) Now we have to spend MORE money, and MORE time probably another 2-3 years on developing AND fucking testing these pointless gimmicks and social features.

Here's the thing. The less time it takes to pressing the button on a controller to an action on screen is the best way to go. Not waving your hands around your living room accidentally slapping your 4 year old kid.

I will admit the kinect thing is kinda cool and I honestly would like to see it more of it but every other motion control is pretty boring for me.

But seriously a screen on a controller? really? Why would I want to look down, away from my game, breaking my immersion? Again. The best way to go is make it take less time between button pressing and something happening. Not taking my eyes off the tv screen to look at some fucking pointless thing on my controller screen because it's required even though it probably just could on the tv screen itself. (Seriously... if any company points a mini map on that fucking screen man.. I'm just going to lose it.)


I really wish that Sony/Microsoft stop treating their consoles like they're suppose to be computers, or some form of mass media. They're not. The only thing they should be focusing on is making consoles gaming machines *and that's it.* anything else is just pointless add ons that nobody really cares.

The only form of media they should put on their is their store, netflix, and maybe a few other things.

But checking your facebook from a console? Really?

I have a 8 year old computer that does it better. Why? I have a fucking keyboard instead of controller. (Which I know you can buy small keyboards for your controllers now, but still!)

 

[PanYue]

Not to be rude but this rant is all over the place, can I get a main point here? You just don't like how they do things, or am I misreading it? Because I struggle to comment on this when I can't see the main thing I should be commenting on.

But for now, I'll talk on this part:
Gimmicks. They will always be a thing for us gamers, I've gotten used to it. I got used to it on the Wii and I got used to it on the Wii U. I bought a kinect and had a shit load of fun playing dancing on the Star Wars game. That was the best party night ever. Didn't buy a Move though. Gimmicks are okay by me half the time, I guess.

 

[The-Traveling-Bard]

Not to be rude but this rant is all over the place, can I get a main point here? You just don't like how they do things, or am I misreading it? Because I struggle to comment on this when I can't see the main thing I should be commenting on.

But for now, I'll talk on this part:
Gimmicks. They will always be a thing for us gamers, I've gotten used to it. I got used to it on the Wii and I got used to it on the Wii U. I bought a kinect and had a shit load of fun playing dancing on the Star Wars game. That was the best party night ever. Didn't buy a Move though. Gimmicks are okay by me half the time, I guess.

Eh, It was just a rant on what was going through my mind. Nothing particularly is the main point.

I agree the only motion control I liked was the kinect. I could really love this system if it turns out in a few more years (Like in the 2020s) into my imagine. (i.e being able to extend your hand and shake someone's hand in game.) would be really cool.

Take it as my first paragraph saying how stupid online passes are.

Then my next few as my long rant I guess.

It's 8 am. ;-;. I just got off work after a long third shift.

 

[DoPo]

Too be honest Online Passes are kinda of a good thing in same cases. Diablo 3, Sim City etc. Are fucking bullshit because NONE OF THOSE GAMES REALLY NEED A CONSTANT CONNECTION. Also the "features that require constant connection." is quite a bullshit excuse. What in God's name are you creating that requires a constant connection. Seriously WHAT FEATURE REQUIRES A CONSTANT CONNECTION.

D3, quite literally, cannot run without connection to the server. It is functioning similarly to MMO - it's constantly downloading content from the server and serving it to you. The only way to sidestep the network requirement is to host the server on your own machine. And Blizzard don't give you access to that.

SimCity claimed it used the same model as D3 but it turned out it was actually a lie.

Assassin's Creed...2 I think it was, (or Brotherhood. But I think 2) had a modification of that - the game just loaded chunks of content needed when needed. As in, when you progress, it would download some stuff to allow you to progress more. It was purely for preventing illegal play...somehow but it was a fucking stupid idea, to be honest, and was later scrapped and removed.

Anyways I would think that constant online probably would mean a tighter security around hackers/botters. (Anyone can correct me if I am wrong. I'm just guessing here.)

No, not really. I mean, it's a reasonable assumption to make but it's not a requirement - the one thing the company who releases an online game would have to care about is someone compromising the game in a way that's harmful to the company and/or a lot of players (they can live with just a handful of players being pissed off). Aside from that, it's up to the company. Blizzard, for example, would want to keep a tighter leash on the economy, so outright cheating, like duping as we've seen twice now, is a big deal for them. Hackers are usually punished, though not necessarily. Depends on how big the exploitations they do, I guess. I recall in D2 maphacks were punishable by bans (maybe temporary ones, can't recall) - I'd say that is a bit extreme.

Botters are in a more grey area, though so if measures are taken, what they are and how strictly they would be applied is up to whoever is in charge of the online play. Also, bottig is a bit harder to catch - I mean, can you easily tell the difference between a. something made to interact with a game for hours, or tens of hours at a time, to sort of play an elaborate slot machine and b. an actual bot? Joking of course.

 

[omega 616]

Your rant was all over the shop, "all gimmicks suck ... except kinect".

To me all gimmicks suck, 3D, kincet, move, screens on controllers, light bars, social aspects, netflix, facebook, HULU, every one of them sucks a big bag of dicks! A super saver bag of dicks! No, a buy one get one free, super saver, large bag of large dicks.

People want great graphics and good frame rate, lets ruin both for 3D ... thanks guys!
kinect and move are both fucking useless for serious games and are far too imprecise, except for dancing.
I've learned to stop looking at controllers, why would I want to start looking at them again?
light bars, why? Was the little LED not extravagant enough? I know it's for move 2.0 but I already went over move.
social aspects, I'm a gamer 'cos I don't like people, even if I did why would I want them to know what I've done in game?
Will never use netflix or HULU 'cos I have a tv with enough channels that I don't watch already.
Facebook is on my phone.

 

[The-Traveling-Bard]

D3, quite literally, cannot run without connection to the server. It is functioning similarly to MMO - it's constantly downloading content from the server and serving it to you. The only way to sidestep the network requirement is to host the server on your own machine. And Blizzard don't give you access to that.

SimCity claimed it used the same model as D3 but it turned out it was actually a lie.

Assassin's Creed...2 I think it was, (or Brotherhood. But I think 2) had a modification of that - the game just loaded chunks of content needed when needed. As in, when you progress, it would download some stuff to allow you to progress more. It was purely for preventing illegal play...somehow but it was a fucking stupid idea, to be honest, and was later scrapped and removed.




No, not really. I mean, it's a reasonable assumption to make but it's not a requirement - the one thing the company who releases an online game would have to care about is someone compromising the game in a way that's harmful to the company and/or a lot of players (they can live with just a handful of players being pissed off). Aside from that, it's up to the company. Blizzard, for example, would want to keep a tighter leash on the economy, so outright cheating, like duping as we've seen twice now, is a big deal for them. Hackers are usually punished, though not necessarily. Depends on how big the exploitations they do, I guess. I recall in D2 maphacks were punishable by bans (maybe temporary ones, can't recall) - I'd say that is a bit extreme.

Botters are in a more grey area, though so if measures are taken, what they are and how strictly they would be applied is up to whoever is in charge of the online play. Also, bottig is a bit harder to catch - I mean, can you easily tell the difference between a. something made to interact with a game for hours, or tens of hours at a time, to sort of play an elaborate slot machine and b. an actual bot? Joking of course.

I mean Diablo 3 could run offline. They made it so you can't do it. They purposely made their game that way. There is no reason why D3 needed to be be a constant connection. There's just NO need for it. I can load games just fine without a connection.

There is no features that I can think of that will ever make want to have a constant connection, ever. Auction house? Well I don't care about it. I'm not against, I just don't care about it. So why would I need a connection for something I will never use? ( Actually I lied. Dragon's Dogma pawn system was cool, and the UR Dragon was a cool idea even if a little flawed due to the endless generation thing which will mean it just gets too strong to fight. BUT even still they still added a offline mode without all that.)

You don't need a connection to play d3.
From my understanding playing Diablo 3 is almost like cloud gaming to me. You're playing on your computer but require their servers to access the game. Even though you have all the files already on your computer. Games for decades have ran just fine without a constant connection. They will continue to do for the rest of time.

Sim City again.. what was the connection for? Multiplayer? Social gimmicks? Both things that are *not needed for my personal enjoyment*"

I bring this up more in detail later. But I am really, really sick of devs going. "This is not how I want to play our game." WILL IT'S NOT LONGER YOUR FUCKING GAME ONCE WE PAY FOR IT. NOW IS IT?!
Games have been just fine without multiplayer and without social interactions for decades. This will continue for the rest of time. Stop trying to force features down my throat that I just do not want. You can make them, but don't force me to use them.

I wish the publishers understood this point.

1. The customers are always right. ( I know this such an ignorant statement by the way, but it is kinda true.)
2. We are customers. That means YOU, as publishers work for US that means *tell you what to do*.

Would you be happy with going to pizza place and ordering a plain cheese pizza but they put ham on it and told you to deal with it?

No. You wouldn't pay for it, and would probably leave.

Remember when I said they publishers say "That's not how I want you to play our game." Well too damn bad. That's how I want to play. I payed for it. I should enjoy it as I see fit. So if that means making a character with 9000 stat points. 210423435 damage and one around one shoting everything. I should be able to do that. I payed for it. (.. I mean in single player. Not online by the way. I get they can control if you're playing on their servers.)

I quit Guild Wars 2 because they flat out said on a live stream that they weren't going to add death matches in the game, and continued on with the capture the points type PvP. WHICH the majority of the community wanted Death Match, and everyone hates the capture points PvP.(Because let's be honest. Unless you have a good team you're kinda screwed, and most people just want to kill other people to begin with so they completely ignore the point system.) They exactly said. "It doesn't fit with our idea of the game." and I was like. "Yup, i'm done. Goodbye."


Onto the Online passes. Even still no matter how smart and clever you design your DRM system. .. Well let me put this way. My dad always says. "No matter what type of anti virus software that comes out. There's always at least 100 college kids in each college trying to break it the protection." Same thing goes with DRM. There will always be college kids trying to crack it for personal joy, or testing their knowledge on software. DRM is a pointless waste of time because there will always be someone smarter to crack it. It's just a endless circle.


EDIT!

Your rant was all over the shop, "all gimmicks suck ... except kinect".

To me all gimmicks suck, 3D, kincet, move, screens on controllers, light bars, social aspects, netflix, facebook, HULU, every one of them sucks a big bag of dicks! A super saver bag of dicks! No, a buy one get one free, super saver, large bag of large dicks.

People want great graphics and good frame rate, lets ruin both for 3D ... thanks guys!
kinect and move are both fucking useless for serious games and are far too imprecise, except for dancing.
I've learned to stop looking at controllers, why would I want to start looking at them again?
light bars, why? Was the little LED not extravagant enough? I know it's for move 2.0 but I already went over move.
social aspects, I'm a gamer 'cos I don't like people, even if I did why would I want them to know what I've done in game?
Will never use netflix or HULU 'cos I have a tv with enough channels that I don't watch already.
Facebook is on my phone.

Well I just happen to like the Kinect. I do think it's more interesting then the other motion controllers. But that doesn't mean I think the Kinect good, or a better gimmick. I don't even own one. I'm just saying in my personal opinion the more interesting one of the bunch. It's one that I would like to see develop over time. Seriously think about it.. In time we can make powerful enough were we could literally interact with the world. Hugging people, shaking people's hand in game. etc. That's what makes interested... but this isn't going to happen for a loooooooong time.

 

[ShinyCharizard]

Motion control for games is stupid as fuck in general I find. Why the fuck would I want to wave my arms around when a simple button press is faster, easier, simpler and much, much more accurate.

 

[krazykidd]

Not to be rude but this rant is all over the place, can I get a main point here? You just don't like how they do things, or am I misreading it? Because I struggle to comment on this when I can't see the main thing I should be commenting on.

But for now, I'll talk on this part:
Gimmicks. They will always be a thing for us gamers, I've gotten used to it. I got used to it on the Wii and I got used to it on the Wii U. I bought a kinect and had a shit load of fun playing dancing on the Star Wars game. That was the best party night ever. Didn't buy a Move though. Gimmicks are okay by me half the time, I guess.

Eh, It was just a rant on what was going through my mind. Nothing particularly is the main point.

I agree the only motion control I liked was the kinect. I could really love this system if it turns out in a few more years (Like in the 2020s) into my imagine. (i.e being able to extend your hand and shake someone's hand in game.) would be really cool.

Take it as my first paragraph saying how stupid online passes are.

Then my next few as my long rant I guess.

It's 8 am. ;-;. I just got off work after a long third shift.

I can guarentee , that in 2020 , you will no longer thinks that's cool . Sounds tedious and pointless to me.

OT: how about, rather than putting DRM or online passes , you give us the choice to play online or not . You know , like they used to , back in my childhood ( i'm 24 ) . Greedy bastards ( EA ).

 

[shadowsandwich]

Wait... Let me clarify something here..
So you're making a thread about EA stopping online passes, although it isn't about EA?
Oh wait! Looking deeper it's not even about the online passes anyway!
To be honest i would much prefer publishers focus on getting content to people faster.

In ye olde times you would just go to your nearest store, buy whatever game you wanted then just stick it in to the consle and play.
Unless you were a pc gamer, then you had to all kinds of BS to get it to run.
The current game consles are like this but not the direction they're heading.
Why do games have to download all their stuff onto my computer? Unless they want me to mod it there's no real point!
How about, for example steam, just download a .exe onto your computer that runs the game of files on the cloud servers.
Any additional content is stored on your computer anyway, but it would make gaming a lot faster!
The .exe could also have a unique auth token that only connects if the server accepts it and it is a known auth token.
There quick and simple game installation without any DRM BS.
It will be a nightmare to code and implement, maybe requiring a completely different program altogether but it will all be worth it.
(Bear in mind i know NOTHING about how network storage works)

Notice how i went completely of topic? readers don't tend to like that very much.

 

[BeeGeenie]

Yes, only violent games sell well.

Spoiler

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/73/Phoenix_Wright_-_Ace_Attorney_Coverart.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ef/Harvest_Moon_-_Magical_Melody_Coverart.png

And obviously gimmicks are killing the industry. Remember when Nintendo took a risk on a touch screen gimmick, now that was just a disaster.
http://www.nintendocity.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ds-sales.png

You are not the only one buying video games! You may not like non-violent games or gimmicks, but there is a market for that. Sony is trying to reach out to that market as well as you. They don't plan to take your FPS games away.

Somebody needs to port Harvest Moon to the 360. For reals.

I would plow that field for days. Giggity.