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

SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed

The EA Forums now offer details on the promise of a free game to compensate SimCity owners for the botched launch of the urban planning sequel. Anyone with a registered copy of SimCity by the end of March 25th will be entitled to download one of the following games from Origin through March 30th:

Battlefield 3 (Standard Edition)
Bejeweled 3
Dead Space 3 (Standard Edition)
Mass Effect 3 (Standard Edition)
Medal of Honor Warfighter (Standard Edition)
Need for Speed Most Wanted (Standard Edition)
Plants vs. Zombies
SimCity 4 Deluxe Edition

View
123 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >

63. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:43 Texas Jake
 
Bubicus wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:35:
If you haven't played it, you really don't have a valid gripe. Quit your nerd raging and go play something else.

Um...

There are only two ways to play it without buying it:

1) visit a friend's house and play it there. That requires your friend to have purchased it, but by now your friend would have already "nerd-raged" about how bad it was when he or she played it.

2) Pirate it. Except we're not supposed to pirate it, and there's some kind of controversial DRM to prevent such naughty behavior.

The "play it first before criticizing" argument is pretty weak in 2013, when many game companies refuse to release demos and we are able to watch YouTube videos of people playing a game.

Then what's the problem? People complaining who haven't even played the game have lost nothing. They just want to get on the 'bash EA' bandwagon for free. You don't like online DRM? Then don't buy it, nothing lost. You don't like it that people who *did* buy it had connection problems? Don't buy it. But this constant bashing is getting old. I bought it, actually played it, love it, and fail to see that the amount of bashing is proportionate to the reality.

Since I bought it and have no substantial gripes about it above any other game I might buy, I think it's pretty nice of EA to give me a free game. I'd enjoy the game just as much either way.

And for those folks bringing up the validity of a lawsuit, I know this gives you a little nerd wet dream to think you're fighting the big bad EA, but the reality is there is no valid lawsuit. EA has apparently made right the connectivity issues, so you're out of luck.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
62. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:42 Beamer
 
Quboid wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:31:
Aside from the legality and such like - how often do gamers threaten lawsuits? How often do gamers actually follow through?

There's few topics with quite as much hot air and impotent rage than a game launch and I'm not just referring to SimCity. Gamers threatening lawsuits deserve to be largely ignored.

Because class action lawsuits are rarely brought up by people, they're brought up by legal firms that do nothing but class action lawsuits. You know, the ones that end up taking 98% of the settlement.

They know damn well that there's no money to be had in these things. They go after things like medical instruments that had complications that left people dead or unable to walk. They go after mortgage companies that left people destitute.

They do not go after video game companies that said their game was awesome but ended up making something moderately crappy (let's be honest, on the scale of Big Rigs to Deus Ex, when SimCity is working it's no worse than middle), nor do they go after an internet service for having connection issues when it first starts, making gamers sit and wait a few minutes to a few days when they want to play.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
61. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:40 JohnnyRotten
 
Quboid wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:31:
Aside from the legality and such like - how often do gamers threaten lawsuits? How often do gamers actually follow through?

There's few topics with quite as much hot air and impotent rage than a game launch and I'm not just referring to SimCity. Gamers threatening lawsuits deserve to be largely ignored.

As a class, they certainly do not seem to particularly threatening in any aspect.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
60. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:37 Quboid
 
Texas Jake wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:30:
If you haven't played it, you really don't have a valid gripe. Quit your nerd raging and go play something else.

Yes, yes they do. Plenty of people here have played and loved the SimCity series for decades; for me it's been well over half my life. SimCity 2000 was the first game I ever bought.

The promises before release (aside from the launch issues) gave people expectations of something much, much more than what they delivered and you don't have to have actually put down your money like you and I have to feel betrayed. The agent system just does not work as they implied.

If you like it, that's fine. I quite like it despite all its failings. But EA deliberately played on our nostalgia and repeatedly lied to us and having had the sense to hold off doesn't negate anyone's disappointment.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
59. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:37 JohnnyRotten
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:21:
I'm going to step back here and say that I have both a law degree and an MBA. You're arguing about your opinion on law and accounting. I am not.

Ahh, now a MBA as well. Quite frankly, I'm not buying what you're selling. Your claims certainly aren't impossible, but as I recall, in the past, you had a bad habit in the past of being in whatever field best supported your argument. I could certainly be mistaken. Perhaps some of the old-timer blues news'ers could chip in here.

I also wonder if the old Blues News posts are still floating around somewhere in an archive somewhere. I think the last time I saw that you had whipped out the I'm in profession X, you claimed you were a lawyer (after previously stating you were in games doing graphic design for games or something posts before that).

Sorry, I know exactly 5 people who are lawyers who post on the internet (I've heard that there may be more than that). Until I have proof that you are one of that club, I'm not going to give your arguments any special weight because of your statements.

Regardless, I'm still going to challenge the veracity of your statements based on their content, not because of your attempts to argue from authority.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
58. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:35 Bubicus
 
If you haven't played it, you really don't have a valid gripe. Quit your nerd raging and go play something else.

Um...

There are only two ways to play it without buying it:

1) visit a friend's house and play it there. That requires your friend to have purchased it, but by now your friend would have already "nerd-raged" about how bad it was when he or she played it.

2) Pirate it. Except we're not supposed to pirate it, and there's some kind of controversial DRM to prevent such naughty behavior.

The "play it first before criticizing" argument is pretty weak in 2013, when many game companies refuse to release demos and we are able to watch YouTube videos of people playing a game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
57. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:31 Quboid
 
Aside from the legality and such like - how often do gamers threaten lawsuits? How often do gamers actually follow through?

There's few topics with quite as much hot air and impotent rage than a game launch and I'm not just referring to SimCity. Gamers threatening lawsuits deserve to be largely ignored.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
56. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:30 Texas Jake
 
I've now played for about 12-14 hours since day before yesterday, my wife as well. The game is a lot of fun, and whatever issues people had with connectivity prior seem to be resolved as I haven't had a hitch except for a great works project we were both contributing to doesn't seem to update consistently (for her it says some resources have been committed, but for me it says all 0s). Other than that, I wouldn't have played this much if the game wasn't fun.

I wish the cities were a little bigger and the AI was a little better, but it really isn't a big deal and I'm sure it'll be worked on. People seem to be hell bent on bashing this game left and right who haven't even bothered playing it, or played it when connectivity issues were rampant and that just left a sour taste.

If you haven't played it, you really don't have a valid gripe. Quit your nerd raging and go play something else.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:21 Beamer
 
JohnnyRotten wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 17:05:
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
What damages are there?

This isn't the first bad launch. Where's the lawsuit for every MMO? Where's the lawsuit for D3? While this is probably the worst launch, the law doesn't really pay attention to degrees of wrongness so much as wrong.

I would think the primary job of the law was to determine the degrees of wrongness. The practice and execution of law over time seems to back this up this theory rather convincingly. There is not a single penalty for all laws (for breaking any a law, you shall be beaten with a wet noodle), and for most laws there are degrees of penalties, with mitigating and aggravating factors often being take into account.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
Why would it go to anything beyond the botched launch? What did EA do wrong? Software is considered imperfect. Entire games have been sold that barely work, but so long as they work they're ok. What was that one? Big Rigs? Hard Rigs? It was a racing game that didn't even have collision detection. Anywhere. You fell through bridges in the tracks. Was there a lawsuit? No.
Why?
Because it's better to have a bit of buyer beware than to force developers to make perfect software (something that is 100% impossible.)
I'm not quite sure how you connect the legal dots from previous example products that did not perform as advertised (hint, hint), to thinking that this automatically binds the consumer or the courts to a value proposition akin to caveat emptor.

I'm sure I could, without a terrible amount of effort come up with hundreds of anecdotal examples of places where the ground seemed ripe for a lawsuit, but they didn't occur. I could also easily do the opposite - lawsuits without grounds. However, both cases would commit the biased sample fallacy, and would not prove my point. However, I would make the point that a lack of previous action on some cherry picked examples does not preclude future action. It's not a precedent when someone decides not to sue. Not suing, of course, may be prudent for many reasons that don't have to do with the "righteousness of the cause".

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
Are you complaining about the forced always-on, which the box clearly states is necessary, or are you complaining about the broken simulation, which no statute or court has every required?

I'm not complaining about anything, as I'm merely an interested observer here. However, I would point out that courts deal every day in specifics during cases that are not encoded into law. The legal system isn't a hard coded tool in which every decision point about every subject, and its details must be decided in advance. It's a framework in which broad principles can be used to determine if harm has come to one or more parties regardless of the specific and atomic complexity of the subject.

I'd also like to point out that there appears to be a case of special pleading in your arguments - that "gaming" or "software" is somehow outside the bounds of normal consumer and legal practices. I would certainly acknowledge that the technology industry has often caused the legislative and judicial branches a fair amount of heart burn because of its fast evolving nature. However, it certainly doesn't exist outside of either.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
And you ask my how I come to the conclusion that no damages can be proven. What damages do you think are involved here?

Lastly, if any game this year would deserve a lawsuit it would be Colonial Marines, but even that has zero chance. Any complaint you could make about CM could be made, to a lesser degree, to every single game ever release (in most cases infinitely lesser degrees.)

Well, I'm not a judge, so I wouldn't be comfortable pretending that I knew what the chances of any hypothetical lawsuit based any any number of approaches could be, but "zero chance" seems to indicate that the power resides completely with one party here. That in, and of itself, would stumble across the inequality of bargaining power issue, which could lead to interesting consequences.

I think there are several angles one could take for both of these products. I've not looked extensively at either, so for both of these, I'm delivering opinions based on second and third hand perceptions of both.

For example, consumer protection laws that deal with warranty and guarantee. Sure, the publishers have come up with some interesting language to try to side step both, but can they? Sure, they've gotten away with it, but that doesn't bind the courts to their actions.

You're comparing defective physical products with software. Courts do not do this.

I'm going to step back here and say that I have both a law degree and an MBA. You're arguing about your opinion on law and accounting. I am not. I hate bringing stuff like that up, but you keep saying "in my opinion" then going into concepts that have gone before courts before. It's easy to tell if a physical device is defective (though even then there's a great deal of buyer beware, hence why the crap that gets sold "as seen on TV" and barely functions will never lead to lawsuits.) It's very hard to make software work properly, very hard to gauge if it is, etc.
I can't think of a single game I've ever played that was bug free.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:12 Redmask
 
edaciousx wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:53:
Yes, it is a decent gesture which is the point I was making. At least you got something as opposed to 100% nothing. What did blizzard give their customers for the Diablo 3 issue? Nothing.

I'm hoping this is just forgetfulness on your part and not outright dishonesty but Blizzard gave consumers a direct refund for 90 days following the release as an apology, regardless of how much they had played the game. So yes they gave consumers something, they gave them their money back, something EA has failed to do. A token gesture from a free game is fine but money speaks louder than free games. That's in addition to the extra patched content they've produced since then, something I doubt EA will be doing much of outside of bug fixes. People can rail at Blizzard about the quality of D3 and I will be right there with them but they stand behind their products.
 
Avatar 57682
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:08 JohnnyRotten
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:32:
You do have to book it somewhere. But the cost is the cost of distribution since it's a digital good. We're talking pennies. The cost of Crysis 3 is tens of dollars.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:32:
And, when someone is claiming that you account for something the same when it's a real money loss as you do when it isn't a real money loss certainly makes me feel like an expert.

Thanks for making your position clear. This gives me a clear picture of your understanding.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:05 JohnnyRotten
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
What damages are there?

This isn't the first bad launch. Where's the lawsuit for every MMO? Where's the lawsuit for D3? While this is probably the worst launch, the law doesn't really pay attention to degrees of wrongness so much as wrong.

I would think the primary job of the law was to determine the degrees of wrongness. The practice and execution of law over time seems to back this up this theory rather convincingly. There is not a single penalty for all laws (for breaking any a law, you shall be beaten with a wet noodle), and for most laws there are degrees of penalties, with mitigating and aggravating factors often being take into account.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
Why would it go to anything beyond the botched launch? What did EA do wrong? Software is considered imperfect. Entire games have been sold that barely work, but so long as they work they're ok. What was that one? Big Rigs? Hard Rigs? It was a racing game that didn't even have collision detection. Anywhere. You fell through bridges in the tracks. Was there a lawsuit? No.
Why?
Because it's better to have a bit of buyer beware than to force developers to make perfect software (something that is 100% impossible.)
I'm not quite sure how you connect the legal dots from previous example products that did not perform as advertised (hint, hint), to thinking that this automatically binds the consumer or the courts to a value proposition akin to caveat emptor.

I'm sure I could, without a terrible amount of effort come up with hundreds of anecdotal examples of places where the ground seemed ripe for a lawsuit, but they didn't occur. I could also easily do the opposite - lawsuits without grounds. However, both cases would commit the biased sample fallacy, and would not prove my point. However, I would make the point that a lack of previous action on some cherry picked examples does not preclude future action. It's not a precedent when someone decides not to sue. Not suing, of course, may be prudent for many reasons that don't have to do with the "righteousness of the cause".

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
Are you complaining about the forced always-on, which the box clearly states is necessary, or are you complaining about the broken simulation, which no statute or court has every required?

I'm not complaining about anything, as I'm merely an interested observer here. However, I would point out that courts deal every day in specifics during cases that are not encoded into law. The legal system isn't a hard coded tool in which every decision point about every subject, and its details must be decided in advance. It's a framework in which broad principles can be used to determine if harm has come to one or more parties regardless of the specific and atomic complexity of the subject.

I'd also like to point out that there appears to be a case of special pleading in your arguments - that "gaming" or "software" is somehow outside the bounds of normal consumer and legal practices. I would certainly acknowledge that the technology industry has often caused the legislative and judicial branches a fair amount of heart burn because of its fast evolving nature. However, it certainly doesn't exist outside of either.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:21:
And you ask my how I come to the conclusion that no damages can be proven. What damages do you think are involved here?

Lastly, if any game this year would deserve a lawsuit it would be Colonial Marines, but even that has zero chance. Any complaint you could make about CM could be made, to a lesser degree, to every single game ever release (in most cases infinitely lesser degrees.)

Well, I'm not a judge, so I wouldn't be comfortable pretending that I knew what the chances of any hypothetical lawsuit based any any number of approaches could be, but "zero chance" seems to indicate that the power resides completely with one party here. That in, and of itself, would stumble across the inequality of bargaining power issue, which could lead to interesting consequences.

I think there are several angles one could take for both of these products. I've not looked extensively at either, so for both of these, I'm delivering opinions based on second and third hand perceptions of both.

For example, consumer protection laws that deal with warranty and guarantee. Sure, the publishers have come up with some interesting language to try to side step both, but can they? Sure, they've gotten away with it, but that doesn't bind the courts to their actions.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 17:00 Beamer
 
netnerd85 wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:57:
They are saying Sorry

I don't even need to click the link to know what this is.

When you think about it, it's amazing that these guys beat out BP for most hated. What BP did was... then again, it seemed less intentional and avoidable, eh?

Sorry!
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:57 netnerd85
 
They are saying Sorry  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:53 edaciousx
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:49:
Killswitch wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:34:
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
One is merely lost revenue, the other is real, actual lost capital.

And only potential lost revenue at that. I'm not sure how anyone can't understand the argument you're making when it makes perfect sense, especially from a corporate standpoint. Minimal revenue losses, large PR gains.

I'm sure whoever was willing to purchase these games at the current asking price have already do so. The rest are waiting for low prices or not interested in purchasing them at all. As someone said earlier, EA has smart bean counters and they know exactly what they are doing. And the DLC issue; I don't think that is merely conspiracy theory, that is a reality. People will, in fact, purchase the DLC and decrease EA's losses substantially.

In truth, I'm sure there was an internal fight over adding DS3 and, to a slightly lesser extent, ME3.

Someone thought they were still selling.
Someone else thought the customers were owed the best they could (reasonably) do.

Glad the latter won out. It doesn't make things right, or even come close to it, but it's a decent gesture.

Yes, it is a decent gesture which is the point I was making. At least you got something as opposed to 100% nothing. What did blizzard give their customers for the Diablo 3 issue? Nothing.


ASeven wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 15:20:
I still haven't been able to stop laughing at the irony of getting SC4 Deluxe for free with this.


edaciousx wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 14:23:
holy crap guys you are all a bunch of ragers. Ever heard of the old saying "Don't look a gift horse in it's mouth?" I mean really, would you just prefer it if EA gave you guys NOTHING at all?

So what if they don't include DLC, like you need it. You guys just cry too damn much.

Let me guess, EA will now pay you a lot for you defending their darling corporation on this board.

Oh wait, no it won't, EA doesn't give a fuck about you, you're just raging because you're a mindless fanboy for whom EA can do no wrong.

Let me leave you the words of RPS because they represent you and TrollingThundr and all your ilk:

"To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. Itís a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisherís burrowing."


I'm not defending EA you moron, I'm defending the act of giving away a game to compensate for issues at launch. And no, I'm not really a fan of EA either. Look at what they did to westwood studios...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:49 Beamer
 
Killswitch wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:34:
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
One is merely lost revenue, the other is real, actual lost capital.

And only potential lost revenue at that. I'm not sure how anyone can't understand the argument you're making when it makes perfect sense, especially from a corporate standpoint. Minimal revenue losses, large PR gains.

I'm sure whoever was willing to purchase these games at the current asking price have already do so. The rest are waiting for low prices or not interested in purchasing them at all. As someone said earlier, EA has smart bean counters and they know exactly what they are doing. And the DLC issue; I don't think that is merely conspiracy theory, that is a reality. People will, in fact, purchase the DLC and decrease EA's losses substantially.

In truth, I'm sure there was an internal fight over adding DS3 and, to a slightly lesser extent, ME3.

Someone thought they were still selling.
Someone else thought the customers were owed the best they could (reasonably) do.

Glad the latter won out. It doesn't make things right, or even come close to it, but it's a decent gesture.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:49 Quboid
 
ASeven wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:24:
Kosumo wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 15:49:
So just to make it clear, you don't understand the saying of "Don't look a gift horse in it's mouth" then? hint, - It's got nothing to do with defending anyone. But don't let that stop you form calling people shills and fanboys.

By the way, if someone who has played the game, enjoyed what they played (people enjoy diffent thing you know) that does not make them a shill, a fanboy or a liar.

"To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. Itís a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisherís burrowing."

It's the only reply to anyone defending this game.

That's very nice, but most of the comments are about the free gift game, not SimCity its self. Further more, people discussing SimCity are hardly defending the state of it and those who aren't 100% negative on the game aren't wrong because you found a neat little quote on RPS.

No one is loudly and proudly defending SimCity and certainly no one considers it controversial to call out anyone who did.

Try forming your own views, based on what you read and how you feel and applying that to the situation. Copying someone else's view is fine if you agree with it but then applying it to largely irrelevant situations doesn't look clever.
 
Avatar 10439
 
- Quboid
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:34 Killswitch
 
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
One is merely lost revenue, the other is real, actual lost capital.

And only potential lost revenue at that. I'm not sure how anyone can't understand the argument you're making when it makes perfect sense, especially from a corporate standpoint. Minimal revenue losses, large PR gains.

I'm sure whoever was willing to purchase these games at the current asking price have already do so. The rest are waiting for low prices or not interested in purchasing them at all. As someone said earlier, EA has smart bean counters and they know exactly what they are doing. And the DLC issue; I don't think that is merely conspiracy theory, that is a reality. People will, in fact, purchase the DLC and decrease EA's losses substantially.
 
Avatar 55372
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:32 Beamer
 
JohnnyRotten wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:23:
Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
Ug.
So, for one, EA owns the games they're giving away. They do not own Crysis 3. There are contractual issues to have concerns about. CryTek likely does not want their product to be given away for free just yet, as it devalues the product, even if they get paid for it.

I wouldn't disagree in the least with this statement. However, my question was how this was an accounting nightmare. Reading on...

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
For another, there are huge accounting differences between giving away something for free that you own and giving away something free that someone else owns. EA giving away DS3 costs it nothing. Nothing at all. There's a possible lost sale, but that doesn't show up in accounting. And there's the cost of distributing on Origin, but that's minimal.

This would be a particularly stupid way to proceed. You book the sale as a loss, and use that against your corporate taxes. You don't just let it vanish into thin air. Actually, I'm not sure if you can - I'm not an accountant, but I've got a feeling that even as a "gift", you'd have to record this somewhere.

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
If EA were to give away Crysis 3, though, it would have to compensate Crytek. They get paid per sale, unlike EAs internal studios. So EA would owe them money. There'd be arguing about how much, but let's assume it falls at whatever Crytek gets at a $60 sale. Assume it's 60% of that. EA would have to give Crytek $36 for each copy they give away. That's a real loss. That needs to show up on the books.
EA wouldn't be able to change the contract terms of amount owned to Crytek per copy. That's already been decided. The only way this would come into play is if Crytek was being compensated as a percentage of the retail cost, and not a flat fee per copy. I'm not a publisher, or the accounting end of a development firm, so I'm not sure of the normal contract practices here. However, this hardly falls under the definition of "accounting nightmare".

Beamer wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 16:10:
One is merely lost revenue, the other is real, actual lost capital.
I don't mean this to be a jerk, but is it that you don't understand how EAs relationship with these developers work, how accounting works, or did you just not think this through?

I did think this through, and found the specific comment made here as being specious at best, thus my question. Speaking in general, perhaps a better approach would be to attempt a conversation first instead of pretending to be an expert in all things, with opinions being dictated as infallible facts.

You do have to book it somewhere. But the cost is the cost of distribution since it's a digital good. We're talking pennies. The cost of Crysis 3 is tens of dollars.

Crysis is not owed a per-copy fee. If so, then the game would always be $X. But it isn't. It starts at $60, will go down to $20, and sales will push it down to $5. Crytek gets a portion of that. It's a percentage, and it's likely a sliding scale based upon pricing (e.g., they may get 60% of the price above $50 but only 50% below $10. Or maybe that's even reversed.)

And, when someone is claiming that you account for something the same when it's a real money loss as you do when it isn't a real money loss certainly makes me feel like an expert.
 
-------------
Music for the discerning:
http://www.deathwishinc.com
http://www.hydrahead.com
http://www.painkillerrecords.com
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: SimCity Compensatory Games Revealed Mar 18, 2013, 16:24 ASeven
 
Kosumo wrote on Mar 18, 2013, 15:49:
So just to make it clear, you don't understand the saying of "Don't look a gift horse in it's mouth" then? hint, - It's got nothing to do with defending anyone. But don't let that stop you form calling people shills and fanboys.

By the way, if someone who has played the game, enjoyed what they played (people enjoy diffent thing you know) that does not make them a shill, a fanboy or a liar.

"To see anyone defending EA and Maxis for the state of SimCity, even were it in perfect working order on launch, depresses me to my core. This self-flagellation-as-skincare notion, where gamers loudly and proudly defend the destruction of their own rights as consumers, is an Orwellian perversity. That it might be considered in any way controversial to call them out on their crap, to point out that no, always-on DRM is not an advantage to anyone, is bewildering. Itís a sign of just how far the gaming world has fallen into the rabbit hole of the publisherís burrowing."

It's the only reply to anyone defending this game.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
123 Replies. 7 pages. Viewing page 4.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo