I have always been a huge fan of the C&C games. Command and Conquer 4 came out this week. I was contemplating purchasing it on Steam. At the bottom of the page, I saw this:
PERSISTENT INTERNET CONNECTION, EA ACCOUNT, REGISTRATION WITH ENCLOSED SERIAL CODE AND ACCEPTANCE OF END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT REQUIRED TO PLAY. SOFTWARE REGISTRATION IS LIMITED TO ONE EA ACCOUNT PER SERIAL CODE AND IS NON-TRANSFERABLE.
Thank you EA. The first three words helped me save $50. We’re reading about people raping Ubisoft all over the Internet about this. Why have we not heard anything about EA?
I’m going to be alarmist and state that PC gaming is going to look really different in the near future. It’ll be more niche, indie, and cheaper. I, for one, welcome it.
This makes me red.
I know the theory is that these companies are just looking for an excuse to get out of the PC game market, and that’s possible certainly. However, assuming they do want to continue doing business, what kind of deluded moron thinks a persistent internet connection is a good idea?
When I was traveling all the time, the only games I could play were the ones I could load on a laptop. An internet connection was often a luxury. Even at home, there are all kinds of things that can go wrong. My internet can go down, their servers can have issues, and about a million things can go wrong in between.
If I can’t login to WoW or something similar, that’s one thing. I get why that doesn’t work. A game that I play on my own? Why do I have to be online for that?
Sure, it sounds like a good idea on paper. What harm could it do? The reality is far different. Take out any moral or ethical issues you have about being monitored, treated like a criminal, etc. and just taking the cold hard reality doesn’t make it any better.
A persistent connection to play is just an incentive to go spend my money somewhere else.
I agree. I won’t go so far as to say that I won’t ever pick up C&C 4 because of the persistent connection needed, but it definately is something that will cool my jets for quite some time.
I am curious about how the EA connection works compared to the Ubisoft one. The instant-boot from a game is what makes the Ubi DRM so egregious.
The theory that they are trying to get out of the PC market is silly. They could A) simply not make a PC Game or B) spend millions of dollars and sacrifice their sanity and free time to make a game only to gimp it in a underhanded attempt to sabotage it.
Call it Occam’s Razor, but it seems if they were really trying to get out of PC, they’d do A. It’s what the brass did when I was at EA Sports.
Couldn’t it be a justification to shareholders and executives that wanted them to make the game?
“Well, we made the game you wanted or told us too, but no one bought it?”
Not usually. Bonuses are based in large part on team performance and team performance is based, in part, on Metacritic. No one is going to make a shit game or do something they know will get hammered in the specialist press and give up their bonuses just to prove a point.
Now, they might gimp it out of ignorance. But I don’t think they would scuttle their chances on purpose.
Ok. Thanks for clarifying. I don’t think the game has been selling well. From an online reviews standpoint, it seems like EA phoned this one in. I’m sad to see the series end this way.
(ASIDE: Thanks for ruining and edifying my life with all your talk about Dominion. Got me hooked a few months back and it’s quite possibly one of the best card games I’ve ever played.)
I make no apologies about getting anyone hooked on Dominion. 🙂