Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

EA Server Shutdowns

EA has updated its list of Service Updates, revealing multiplayer servers that are hitting end-of-life (thanks Polygon). They say such decisions are never easy, explaining: "We would rather our hard-working engineering and IT staff focus on keeping a positive experience for the other 99% of customers playing our more popular games. We hope you have gotten many hours of enjoyment out of the games and we appreciate your ongoing patronage." They also announce a change for their free-to-play games, saying they will all begin using the same virtual currency called "Play4Free Funds," a name which may strike users as ironic when they pay for them. There are only a few PC titles impacted: The Sims 2 for PC/MAC and TheSims2.com will shut down on January 14, FIFA Soccer 11 for PC and consoles will conclude on January 11, and FIFA Manager 11 for PC ends on January 3.

View
62 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >

62. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 7, 2013, 16:19 RollinThundr
 
Elessar wrote on Jan 7, 2013, 14:55:
TheEmissary wrote on Jan 1, 2013, 13:25:
If the game isn't multiplayer-only or a MMO game then it should have some form of offline play. Give us something to be able to play when the internet is having issues or when you retire the servers.
I've yet to see EA release a game that requires us to be online for SP and then yank the server so no one can ever play, online or offline. So forgive me if I don't throw a tantrum like half the people in this thread and grab a pitchfork. No one's willing to admit the possibility that they may patch the game to allow offline play before they take the server down. But that would be the opposite of flaming EA and isn't welcome in these parts.

That was kinda the point I was trying to get across but you worded it far better.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
61. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 7, 2013, 14:55 Elessar
 
TheEmissary wrote on Jan 1, 2013, 13:25:
If the game isn't multiplayer-only or a MMO game then it should have some form of offline play. Give us something to be able to play when the internet is having issues or when you retire the servers.
I've yet to see EA release a game that requires us to be online for SP and then yank the server so no one can ever play, online or offline. So forgive me if I don't throw a tantrum like half the people in this thread and grab a pitchfork. No one's willing to admit the possibility that they may patch the game to allow offline play before they take the server down. But that would be the opposite of flaming EA and isn't welcome in these parts.
 
Avatar 46094
 
"You don't get what you deserve, you get what you get."
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
60. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 6, 2013, 21:48 Dades
 
http://i.imgur.com/NRzIH.jpg
 
Avatar 54452
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
59. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 13:25 TheEmissary
 
If the game isn't multiplayer-only or a MMO game then it should have some form of offline play. Give us something to be able to play when the internet is having issues or when you retire the servers.

It should be immediately obvious by now that the games that are heavy handed with the online component in a traditionally single player genre is going to be given flak. Continuing to shut down game servers without any type solution is not going to endear good will for your next games.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
58. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 13:03 Verno
 
Smellfinger wrote on Jan 1, 2013, 12:00:
The general principle is offensive because it's a contagion that has infected the industry as a whole. It's not a phenomenon that is localized to EA.

I find the idea that the players don't care pretty silly too, people say "no one cares" without any real proof of it, they just assume that's the case because its an old game that they do not personally care about. It's a lot harder for a smaller pocket of people to get a Reddit protest going or something but the idea that they don't matter is fucking offensive, they paid the same amount of money for their copy. Not everyone wants to run the upgrade train every time a new version comes out. I have a ton of old games in my library that I revisit over the years and it would really bum me out not to be able to just because Corporate Funbux wants to maximize its bottom line. Why should I as a gamer be understanding or care about shitty corporate practices? It's amusing to me how poorly people value their own consumer buying power and rights these days. "Oh whoops no biggie I dont play that game anymore". Gaming isn't just a small time hobby, it's a serious industry now and these things do matter in the long run.

Shutting off multiplayer of a 2+ year old sports title that no one plays anymore is not this big end of the world deal some of you are crying about.

Yeah it is actually a big deal, as people have explained to you a few times already. You can choose not to care but it's going to directly impact you all the same. A business has every right to make money but when financial concerns trump both creative goals and reasonable consumer ownership then I think we've got a problem. So yeah people will hopefully vote with their wallet but they should also make as much noise on forums, email, whatever as possible.

Also the idea that this is a working business model that people should just accept is flawed logic, many gaming publishers aren't even in the black these days. It's certainly a business model but whether its sustainable in the long run without consumer fatigue from the upgrade cycle remains to be seen.

This comment was edited on Jan 1, 2013, 13:10.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: Alien Isolation, Legend of Grimrock 2, Super Mario 3D World
Watching: A Good Marriage, The Knick, Gotham
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
57. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 12:21 RollinThundr
 
Dades wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 17:55:
RollinThundr wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 17:38:
Listen, I've heaped my share of criticism EA's way over the years, especially with how they handled the Elevation Partners fiasco and what Bioware became because of it, but for shit like this, that ALL publishers do? C'mon, with all the reasons to hate EA or bash them, this isn't really that valid a reason.

I don't know what crack you're smoking but shutting down functionality of purchased content is about the most valid reason to bitch about companies as I can imagine short of them just taking your money and saying nyah nyah.

- DADES - This is a signature of my name, enjoy!

Shutting off multiplayer of a 2+ year old sports title that no one plays anymore is not this big end of the world deal some of you are crying about.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
56. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 12:00 Smellfinger
 
NKD wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 14:55:
Like I said, there's never any outcry from players when these things get shut down. Just people getting offended at the general principle.

The general principle is offensive because it's a contagion that has infected the industry as a whole. It's not a phenomenon that is localized to EA.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 11:08 Eirikrautha
 
Beamer wrote on Jan 1, 2013, 04:53:
This is what I said in the last topic about this. Anyone playing a 3 year old Madden game isn't an EA customer, really. If they hold onto it that long they're less likely to pay $60 for current rosters and more likely to not care about rosters and either not really play online (because the community overwhelmingly moves to current rosters) or just buys the 2 year old version for $2.99, the going rate for a 2 year old sports game at GameStop.
Oh, really? How about those people playing NHL 2009? Since EA no longer releases NHL games on the PC, when they shut down online servers for NHL 2009 a year ago, all PC players were pretty much shut out of the online component permanently. There are quite a few people who would love to play a "modern" NHL game (see the forums on breakaway.net), in fact there a a large number of people modding present rosters into a 4+ year old game, simply because they have no other choice! They WOULD be EA customers... but EA doesn't want them.

So your statement about the people being cut off not being willing to pay for new games, not being interested in new rosters, and not playing online are demonstrably false in this case.... EA just doesn't care a bit about them...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Jan 1, 2013, 04:53 Beamer
 
NKD wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 14:55:
Smellfinger wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 14:47:
Planned obsolescence is just a step on the path to games-as-a-service. It's one of the many early symptoms of a terminal disease.

Is it really planned though? I mean unless EA is carefully crafting their titles to get boring fast so people will have to buy new games, hmm...

Like I said, there's never any outcry from players when these things get shut down. Just people getting offended at the general principle. So what's more likely?

1) They don't care that their precious game got shut down, so they didn't speak up.
2) EA systematically had all those players disappeared into unmarked vans.
3) Those players quit playing months or years ago and give no fucks.

Ima go with 3.

This is what I said in the last topic about this. Anyone playing a 3 year old Madden game isn't an EA customer, really. If they hold onto it that long they're less likely to pay $60 for current rosters and more likely to not care about rosters and either not really play online (because the community overwhelmingly moves to current rosters) or just buys the 2 year old version for $2.99, the going rate for a 2 year old sports game at GameStop.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 23:41 Dades
 
Creston wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 22:26:
Panickd wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 18:16:
And before you go off on a "it shouldn't have to be that way" rant, I totally agree. But the world isn't always as we would like it to be and so we deal with what is.

I never claimed otherwise. I deal with it by refusing to buy this kind of horseshit. If you deal with it by rolling over and telling EA this is perfectly acceptable behavior, then by all means, go ahead

The really stupid part was where he said you do that but also that it doesn't matter and nothing we do matters. Companies prey on general ignorance and that kind of consumer apathy. Maybe he thinks it doesn't matter but I will not buy it, I will bitch about it and tell other people so they can do the same.

- DADES - This is a signature of my name, enjoy!
 
Avatar 54452
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 22:26 Creston
 
Panickd wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 18:16:
And before you go off on a "it shouldn't have to be that way" rant, I totally agree. But the world isn't always as we would like it to be and so we deal with what is.

I never claimed otherwise. I deal with it by refusing to buy this kind of horseshit. If you deal with it by rolling over and telling EA this is perfectly acceptable behavior, then by all means, go ahead.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Dec 31, 2012, 21:30 Krizzen
 
In other news: Valve is shutting down Counter-Strike servers that are hitting end-of-life.

Oh wait...
 
Avatar 57568
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 21:29 HorrorScope
 
deqer wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 19:28:
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 13:32:
But I also think it's fair to say the majority of buyers rarely go back to something old and if they do it's a couple games.
You really are missing the point about why this bad, and why people don't like it--and why people shouldn't like it.

Hopefully someone explained it to you somewhere on page 2 or 3 of this news thread.

I miss none of the point. I allow you to have your choice as well as have my opinion of it, your welcome. But I am not going to worry about something that hasn't affected me. It's EA there idiots, we all know that, so why would it affect anyone, you shouldn't be buying EA games right?
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 21:20 Panickd
 
Dades wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 18:45:
Panickd wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 18:16:
That's a bit over dramatic. If Sim City (or any game for that matter) ends up insanely popular and EA pulls the plug someone will find a way to hack together some sort of server emulator that will allow people to keep playing until their eyeballs bleed.

People can't just throw together a server emulator lickity split, companies like EA are making it more and more difficult by putting things like AI on the server. Their whole reason for doing this sort of stuff is lack of alternatives, they want you behind their paywall for life, buying upgrades, DLC and whatever else they can dream up. Maybe it's the world we live in but people don't need to like it.

They are doing this intentionally, not a single person has offered an explanation of why they can't just run a glorified authentication server and use P2P if it's so cost ineffective for them to run multiplayer servers.

- DADES - This is a signature of my name, enjoy!

I never said it could be done "lickity split", only that it could be done and if a game is popular enough it's inevitable that it will be done. And I don't doubt that they're doing this kind of thing deliberately, it's a business model that, despite the hemming and hawing here, seems to be working for them.

People don't like day one DLC either. You see nothing but bitching over it everywhere you go online and yet publishers keep putting it out there. Why? Simple: people are buying it in pretty striking numbers. If they weren't it would be a fading memory.

People snap up XBox 360 games like tic tacs, but Microsoft isn't going to support Live play on the 360 indefinitely. At some point it will be EOL'd just like it was for the original XBox. That doesn't keep people from buying.

People pissed and moaned over Diablo III's always online requirement and what happened? It was one of the best selling PC games ever.

If you don't like the business practices of a company don't spend your money on their products. Just don't fool yourself into thinking it's going to change anything. Or you can bitch loudly and then buy their crap anyway, like most people do.

Dev wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 20:21:
Not sure which game you are referring to, but you should know by now that ALL ea games are subject to having online/multiplayer being shut down.

On another note, if a game has a smaller following, its unlikely to get enough interest for someone to make any sort of server emulation for it.

Not "all" EA games are subject to these policies. The older EA games with community run servers are still out there and still being played by lots of people.

And it's true that smaller games probably won't get any love from the cracking/emulation community. It's a price that you pay when you give most of the control to the guy with his hand in your wallet. But you can bet even money that popular games will see the hackers come out of the woodwork the way they did for the popular MMOs back before they all went "free" to play.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Dec 31, 2012, 20:21 Dev
 
Not sure which game you are referring to, but you should know by now that ALL ea games are subject to having online/multiplayer being shut down.

On another note, if a game has a smaller following, its unlikely to get enough interest for someone to make any sort of server emulation for it.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 19:40 deqer
 
bhcompy wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 16:58:
You're not paying for software, you're paying for a temporary license to access the software.
Had the game box said anything like this on it, then I wouldn't even purchased the game in the first place.

Burying it in the EULA is not acceptable either. I take the EULA has "common sense" set of rules, and therefore I don't read it.

But a topic/subject like this, is not common sense. It is "what the fuck?" sense.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Dec 31, 2012, 19:36 deqer
 
Dades wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 16:16:
A company like EA buys bandwidth in bulk and won't save any money there either.
Perhaps EA shouldn't be making games like this if it relies on everyone to participate for it to be worthwhile.

If that's the case, then shouldn't the game box be saying "Game will shutdown if not enough people are interested." -- shouldn't it be saying that?

Like I said before, had I know this would happen, then I wouldn't even bothered with it in the first place; I wouldn't even purchased the game to begin with.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: EA Server Shutdowns Dec 31, 2012, 19:33 deqer
 
D_K_night wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 15:42:
my expectation is that 40 years from now, I dust off an EA game, and I expect to be able to play it.

I paid good money for that, and that expectation is neither whiny, entitled, nor misguided.
Exactly.

Had I known the game would be shutdown later on, then I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. Had EA put on the game box to let know this would happen, then I wouldn't have bought the game in the first place.

Why would I get into a game that I know is going to be taken away from me permanently? That's essentially what's happening here. Why would I want to do that to myself? Why would anyone?

You see.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 19:28 deqer
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 13:32:
But I also think it's fair to say the majority of buyers rarely go back to something old and if they do it's a couple games.
You really are missing the point about why this bad, and why people don't like it--and why people shouldn't like it.

Hopefully someone explained it to you somewhere on page 2 or 3 of this news thread.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: More Big Picture Details Dec 31, 2012, 19:05 NKD
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 18:43:
bhcompy wrote on Dec 31, 2012, 16:58:
Do you have any doubt that they will sunset the SC5 servers when the user threshold drops too low to effectively monetize the base through downloadable content?

None, it will shut down. To date I have personally not been effected one time by server shutdown, so I don't get worked up over something that hasn't hit me. But you might, so you have to do what you have to do. In a perfect world, they would run forever.

That's sort of how I feel. I don't like the concept of a game just becoming unplayable indefinitely, but in practice, aside from some MMOs they've never shut down a game I've been playing, nor have I fired up a game only to find the servers are no longer there.

I'm sure I own plenty of games with now-crippled functionality, but EA has chosen which ones to shut down pretty smartly because they haven't affected me yet.
 
Avatar 43041
 
If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
62 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo