EA Shutting Down Video Game Servers Prematurely 341
Spacezilla writes "EA is dropping the bomb on a number of their video game servers, shutting down the online fun for many of their Xbox 360, PC and PlayStation 3 games. Not only is the inclusion of PS3 and Xbox 360 titles odd, the date the games were released is even more surprising. Yes, Madden 07 and 08 are included in the shutdown... but Madden 09 on all consoles as well?"
I, for one (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's enforced obsolescence. If you can't play the game you bought last year, it means you need the one they released this year.
Simple marketing.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Strange game. The only way to win seems to be not to play.
Madden 0x10 (Score:5, Funny)
Direct multiplayer? (Score:2)
From what I understand, I thought each of these games on consoles, that one of the players will be the 'server' - and that the role of the EA server is matchmaking etc, but clarification would
Re:Direct multiplayer? (Score:4, Insightful)
From what I understand, I thought each of these games on consoles, that one of the players will be the 'server' - and that the role of the EA server is matchmaking etc, but clarification would be cool.
I'm pretty certain that in all cases none of the consoles involved is acting as a server. If one was than that player could have a significant advantage due to relative latency issues. Also having a console act as a server means having to deal with NAT, firewalls and other routing/network issues - the only guaranteed way for all the consoles to see the server being if the server is public (i.e. not on a console on someone's home ISP connection) or for a public server to act as a relay for those that can't connect directly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Direct multiplayer? (Score:5, Insightful)
Good points, and I guess that is why other game vendors (Valve) offer dedicated servers for download. You can install those on some rented server at an ISP which has a much better internet connection than at your home. This way, the game vendor has to support only the matchmaking service which is presumably much cheaper to run - Valve still supports Half-Life 1 under Steam which is 10 years old. The obvious downside is that you pay for the game server. But I still like this model better than having my games killed after a year.
EA could do this too of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Direct multiplayer? (Score:5, Informative)
From what I understand, I thought each of these games on consoles, that one of the players will be the 'server' - and that the role of the EA server is matchmaking etc, but clarification would be cool.
I'm pretty certain that in all cases none of the consoles involved is acting as a server. If one was than that player could have a significant advantage due to relative latency issues. Also having a console act as a server means having to deal with NAT, firewalls and other routing/network issues - the only guaranteed way for all the consoles to see the server being if the server is public (i.e. not on a console on someone's home ISP connection) or for a public server to act as a relay for those that can't connect directly.
you are wrong, most console games don't have dedicated servers, and you can host even if you are behind a nat, they probably use something like udp hole punching
you probably missed the rage of pc call of duty players that now have to use the same matchmaking system(iwnet) as console players without dedicated servers
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
For most games on Xbox Live microsoft hosts the matchmaking servers and the friends thing as well. It means that you should be able to play the game online forever until microsoft shuts down the server.
I know of one non-EA exception which only shut down part of the online component to a mech game that needed a special controller (very niche), and it was for the original xbox.
EA forces online games to use their servers for matchmaking rather than the general ones. It means that at any time EA can stop provid
"but please feel free to buy our '10 versions!" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That's like a mugger leaving a card thanking you for your custom and asking you to use his services again.
It's more like if he offered to sell you a new wallet, while politely reminding you that he'd probably be back to steal it again at the same time next year.
Multiplayer != online multiplayer (Score:2)
if the game says multiplayer when you buy it, the company is responsable for keeping the servers running even if theres only 2 people on it
It's still multiplayer even if it's not online multiplayer. As I understand it, the Xbox 360 platform supports both the model of multiple controllers plugged into one console and the System Link model of multiple consoles on a local area network.
Re: (Score:2)
Or... you know they could let players run their own.
This is the major complaint with Modern Warfare 2. Many people shrug that off too, maybe now they'll see why player run servers are a necessity.
I recognize this strategy (Score:2, Funny)
Also, what kind of traffic are these titles currently generating on EA's servers?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and here is the real issue.
If it is "a lot" then they risk upsetting a lot of customers, bad pr, etc.
if it is not "a lot" then you'd have to wonder what is the rush. If its a tiny amount, amalgamate, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Really....
Seems to me that as soon as the next copy of Madden 09 is sold, EA has committed fraud, then.
I know this is EA and not Blizzard, (Score:5, Interesting)
but my buddy who is still semi-involved in the BNET-D [wikipedia.org] legal debacle can use this type of thing in that court case.
I for one think the whole company run server idea is a good one, but I think they should release code for every game as well for this very reason. Custom servers were half the fun of old Unreal Tournament games, and I know a lot of people who are into custom Enemy Territory servers.
Remember, the reason BNET-D started to begin with is Bizzards servers sucked back in the day, as far as I'm concerned this sort of bull shit justifies that sort of thing.
Yep, dedicated servers are a great solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Our company has provided commercial game server management services for almost 10 years for a large ISP client in Australia. We have watched games rise and fall over this entire time. And the games with dedicated server software - games like Quake, which came out in 1996 - are still just as playable today as they were back then (often more so thanks to enhanced community-created features).
There are a few exceptions to that - AvP2 ran into problems recently when they shut down the master server/s. But a community project has worked around this.
We recently published a guide - the Mammoth Dedicated Server Guide [mammothmedia.com.au] - for game developers and publishers trying to explain to them why they should release dedicated server software (inspired in no small part by Modern Warfare 2's lack of dedicated server). We're hoping to make more people aware of it, and more importantly, more gamers aware of the issues surrounding games without dedicated servers (such as this story!!!!), so that when they're choosing what games to spend money on, they can show more discrimination.
Re:I know this is EA and not Blizzard, (Score:5, Insightful)
Pee on code, we don't want the code, we want the specs. Give us the specifications of how the client and server communicate and we'll do the rest... when it's worth it. Besides, the code is theirs, but it's reasonable for the specs to be ours (perhaps charging a reasonable cost for distribution.)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering I know insiders, and I remember the time period BNET-D came out I will say the battle.net servers absolutely sucked at that time. StarCraft lagged and crashed out all the time, and when Diablo 2 came out both became worse (I didn't do much Diablo 1 online, only LAN)
Back then, I was a Novell guy anyways, and we already had IPX running everywhere I went, so LAN wasn't bad, but that didn't take care of things when you didn't have your buddies over. BNET-D was a fix to a problem that existed.
Nobod
Blizzard didn't cooperate (Score:5, Insightful)
BNET-D started because several individuals had banned CD-Keys or wished to play with pirated versions of Blizzards games.
As I understand it, the bnetd developers contacted Blizzard to ask how to verify CD keys, and when Blizzard refused to cooperate, the bnetd developers continued without the feature.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If that were true, then the bnetd devs were essentially asking for details on the CD key creation algorithm. In order to validate a CD key derived from a 1-way hash, you need the creation algorithm. In order to validate a CD key derived from 2-way encryption, you would need only the decryption algorithm but providing that is a
Re:Blizzard didn't cooperate (Score:4, Interesting)
Blizzard could have provided a simple TCP/IP-based API for them to call to verify a key. Then Blizzard could keep all the details secret, and the bnetd folks could still build in key verification.
Re:Blizzard didn't cooperate (Score:4, Insightful)
And.. what would Blizzard have gotten out that equation?
People with cracked keys wouldn't be playing online?
It isn't like their decision to allow for authentication hurt anybody else. Everybody else just doesn't authenticate the keys. It actually makes their software more functional.
Re:Blizzard didn't cooperate (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no reason that in order to allow bnet to authenticate keys that Blizzard would need to give them the ability to create keys.
If bnet just wanted to collect valid keys - they can do that already. After all, they'll have tons of legit clients connecting to them all the time and they could just ask those clients for their keys unless Blizard thought to make the clients authenticate those requests.
The issue is that Blizard wants to cry "they're allowing piracy" and then when bnet says "ok, show us how not to" their only response amounts to "just shut down." Blizard does not have any legal right to control what 3rd-party servers their customers connect to, and they're using piracy as an excuse to eliminate competition.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is only 1 way to verify the key. Check it against the database of released keys (and only Blizzard has that database, obviously).
The key checking algorhythm can easily be reversed via a debugger and a couple of well placed break points.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If I asked you for the algorithm to crack your product you probably wouldn't hand it out either
Is it really "cracking" to use a web service that states whether there is a valid subscription associated with this CD key and PIN?
Re: (Score:2)
Have you played Diablo II recently? There's so much in-game spam that you sometimes can't even see what you're doing.
The way those spambots act is even worst: they enter the game, spew about 5-10 lines of text then magically leave the game as a timeout instead of a regular "player X has left the game".
I know private games with passwords are an easy work-around, but it does show that Blizzard cares enough about its old games to keep battle.net running for them but not enough to get the spammers out (which wo
What Happened? (Score:5, Informative)
I remember back in the early eighties EA used to release some great games.
Anyone remember Skyfox, Pinball Construction Set, The Bard's Tale series and Racing Destruction Set?
All they seem to do now is publish endless sports titles and I imagine the licensing fees must be huge.
Maybe it is a "Good Thing" they are shutting down the services for these titles - one less reason to buy them.
The decision seems to be mainly the Sports Division of EA hopefully this decision won't start affecting other games genres.
Games affected:
February 2, 2010 Online Service Shutdown
* UEFA Champions League 07 PC and x360
* Facebreaker x360 and PS3
* Fantasy Football 09 x360 and PS3
* FIFA 07 PSP, PS2, PC
* Fight Night Round 3 PS2
* Madden 08 Wii
* Madden 08 PC
* Madden 09 Xbox1
* Madden 09 Wii and PSP
* March Madness 07 x360
* NBA 07 PSP, x360
* NBA 08 PS2, PSP, Wii
* NBA 09 Wii - Europe only
* NBA Street (2007) PS3 and x360
* NCAA Football 08 PS2
* NCAA Football 09 PS2
* NASCAR 08 PS2
* NASCAR 09 PS2
* NASCAR 09 PS3 and x360 - Europe Only
* NFL Tour PS3 and x360
* NHL 07 PSP and x360
* NHL 08 PC
* Tiger Woods 07 PC
* Madden 09 x360 and PS3
* Madden 07 Xbox 360
So the rule is (Score:2, Insightful)
Or called Facebreaker
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Maybe this is EAs plan to stop their endless sports cycle and get back to great games. Madden 10 will be the last Madden till it is deemed necessary for an update?
Heres hoping?
Re:What Happened? (Score:4, Interesting)
EA was never great, even back then. What made EA huge is they were simply "good" games, and they could raise enough money to buy out all of their competition.
This gave EA yet more leverage with retail... and when all the indie retail shops and smaller chains folded leaving pretty much just GameSpot... well, that pretty much killed off everything else in the ecosystem. Trip Hawkins was a total douche, and set the stage for who EA is today.
EA is like a corporate amoeba, with all the powers of Microsoft and Monsanto rolled into one. I'm honestly curious why EA hasn't just put out their own hardware platform, but the answer is probably because they don't "need" to, and they're much more powerful controlling all of the platforms from behind the scenes.
EA is pretty much the reason I have AVOIDED consoles, and always stuck with PC games, where you have many more choices. I did get a PS3, mainly for Blu-Ray and as a media center.
Someone gave me a steering wheel and pedal set as a gift, so I bought NASCAR 09 for the PS3.
Here's what I expect of any game: that it will be frozen in time, and obviously not contain 2010 players cars, or information.
Putting the "year" in the title should simply designate what year or version I bought... just like say Microsoft Word or Gentoo versions.
What I did NOT expect is that EA had a remote doomsday switch for these games, so they can kill off the old version.
If that's the case (and it looks like NASCAR 09 is scheduled for termination in Europe) I'm seriously fucking pissed.
We all say "boycott XXX" and "I'll never buy from XXX", but when a cool game comes out memories get short.
But if you shell out a ton of money for a game, it's YOURS.
They can call it "taking down the servers", but I call it theft and when my game stops working, EA will have burned me in a way that I can't EVER forget.
That'll teach you (Score:2)
...to only buy versions of their games every few years, despite the fact that EA traditionally only makes cosmetic and superficial changes to yearly release games, yet of course charges full price for them. When you think about it, it's damn near like stealing.
At least we know the good people at EA are continuing to find innovative and new ways to be evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... But this shutdown is mild in comparison to some [penny-arcade.com] of the things they've done
Gamestop (Score:5, Informative)
Box (Score:5, Informative)
The back of the box clearly states(in small print) that the online service is only provided for 1 year from release date. The fact that they've lasted this long is just a bonus. I could understand if people were bitching and there was no warning, but there is.
Re: (Score:2)
People very rarely read the small print, or a lot of products currently on the market would not sell at all.
Hopefully being screwed over a few times will teach people to actually read the small print!
I bought quake (the original) many years ago, i have always been able to play it online, the sourcecode to the game was released a few years ago so i am able to play modernised versions (so i'm not even restricted to dosbox as with many older games).
Re: (Score:2)
So true. If only people could get stung by DRM more as well, but alas they don't.
As for the dropping of Madden '09, well, EA do have Madden '10 out, so they've got to get people buying it somehow!
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like EA is trying to reposition their brand. Perhaps they should go the whole way and rebrand entirely.
EA (Electronic Arts) becomes BO (Built-in Obsolescence).
From 'EA Sports, it's in the game' to 'BO Sports, the contents of this box stink'.
Re:Box (Score:4, Insightful)
(AFAIK, the 1.24 patch for Warcraft 3, which was released last year, was a change of the API of its scripting engine to block security holes caused by malicious maps, not just small tweaks. Who else does that for six-year-old games?)
Not to rain on your Blizzard-worshiping parade, but I'm pretty sure that if they'd released any other games in that time besides WoW and were not still selling six-to-eleven year old games at 6-month-old game prices (WC3, SC, and Diablo 2 Battle Chests, still going for 39.99).
And people still buy them, so of course they have to keep them patched. There's no altruism or fan loyalty there. They've managed to keep sales channels for old games open to a degree that would make Nintendo blush.
No surprise there (Score:5, Insightful)
This why people shouldn't buy their games. There is no need for EA to be the middle man in online gaming but they do it purely to have control. They don't need you playing Madden 08 year after year. They need you to buy every version. Quite frankly I'm surprised they don't shut the servers down for the previous version the day the new version is released. It probably will get to that point.
Re: (Score:2)
Consumers need to demand the ability to run private game servers. Then boycott. If your going to boycott something you should tell they company why you are doing so, I would encourage everyone who is pissed of about this to contact EA prior to the boycott.
They will listen when they see the market drop. Just because they ignore complaint emails now doesn't mean they will continue to do so when they notice their falling profit line..
Why the need to shut down anything (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Money.
Re: (Score:2)
From an administrative & hardware standpoint I'd say you save money by virtualizing. No need to have dedicated machines any more since you can run a fixed amount of hardware and spawn instances on demand.
From a marketing perspective they may make more money by shutting down servers but it could easily be counterproductive too. If people become aware that they get maybe 12-18 months tops and their their game is deliberately crippled they might avoid EA titles.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Money" as in "people shell out $60 for the 2010 version".
And they will. Make no mistake. Any backlash on this will be minimal. EA has been selling the annual series of these games for years now, and only guarantee server access for one year, after which you either multiplay locally, set up your own server somewhere, or shell out the bucks for the next version. They're just a couple of years behind in their server shutdown schedule. EA is also the only one licensed to do games with real names and logos
Now (Score:3, Insightful)
Money. Now.
Organizations commonly become short-sighted. They become so worried about increasing profits this quarter that they really stop caring about the distant future.
The Daily Show interviewed a legislator in some state with budget shortfalls. Her plan was to sell the government buildings to a private company and then lease them back for twenty years. That would let them fill a $20 million gap in the year that the buildings were sold. When asked how the state would ever pay the rent in following years
Luckily for us (Score:3, Interesting)
And another reason why you don't buy EA... (Score:2)
...in the first place.
They do not care at all if you have fun, or got anything from it.
They only care, if you give them the money. The only reason they are not selling empty boxes, is because they try to steer clear of getting a class action lawsuit for fraud. But they try to get as close as possible to that magic line, as long as it means more money.
And what do you expect from a company that basically works like a ancient galley, or a gulag... powered by mindless slaves, and controlled by someone who would
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: If you bought a couple of multiplayer EA games, that includes you. But at least you got a chance. ^^
TFTFY
Money, Money, and Money. (Score:5, Insightful)
The economy blows, so to the average guy, is it really worth $50 to upgrade to 10 or is 09 good enough as it is?
It just boils down to money. Plain and simple. Not even the cost of running the servers, but forcing everyone that thought Madden 09 was just fine for their needs to go out and pickup Madden 10.
Re:Money, Money, and Money. (Score:5, Insightful)
I was going to mod you and the previous poster higher but I HAD to respond.
This PISSES me off. I've owned every Madden since 06 on the Xbox360 and a few on the GameCube.
Year after year the manuals have been reduced to 4 page leaflets. My 04 Madden on the Gamecube came with a superb manual. It was excellent and showed they somewhat cared about making a polished game.
I can certainly understand the need to close say a 06 server, even an 07 and 08. But to close the 09? That's ridiculous.
You are correct it's all about money. I don't know the numbers but I guarentee Madden 10 sold less than 09. 09 was good, 10 less so. I despise EA and I will not buy another sports game from them. Sadly they have bought up other companies whose games I really enjoy. It just SICKENS me what they have done to this industry! The fact that there are no other football alternatives is pretty gross.
This is a direct message to EA I will never buy another sports game from you.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember getting a madden (I think 98) for Playstation and they crammed a THICK manual into a CD jewel case along with a poster with all of the plays. That used to be standard. Now it's a pathetic controller diagram (if that) and that's it.
However, I do have to disagree that the reason manuals (across the board on most games) have become thinner is that in game training is taking it's place. With it being easier to produce interactive training, why bother making print media. With the first madden that
Re: (Score:2)
Since you own the 09 version, can you tell us how many people are playing right now? I'm willing to bet with the 2010 version out, the number is so insignificant that it's not worth keeping the servers running anymore..
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
People say "$60 for a new roster", not realizing that accurate portrayal of the players and stats is probably the #2 reason people buy these games. I don't play sports games since NFL blitz, but if I was going to buy NCAA 10 I would want my school's players and stats to be represented, otherwise why even bother, just make a robot space football game.
I know sports is antithetical to most slashdotters but a lot of people into sports enjoy the stats, enough so that a lot of them are into fantasy football. Whil
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a big sports game player, but if a company shut down a major feature of the previous year's version that I bought so they could push this year's new version on me, I'd seriously reconsider ever buying from them again. So you pay them $50 for Madden 10 and then what? You get 12 months or so of play before they shut that down to push Madden 11? I can't see this working to increase sales that much. Instead, I think it will tarnish EA's reputation which will lead to reduced sales in the long run.
Odd? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure why they find the PS3 shutdown odd, but the general understanding of the 360's online capability was that the multiplayer servers were part of the Xbox Live network and would last as long as Live does.
Watch out, MW2 lovers... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some weeks ago, there were some heated discussions here and elsewhere about COD4 Modern Warfare 2 and the decision NOT to include the capability to create dedicated servers for online play. There was a great deal of anger from some COD4 fans who had found that the LAN play was the most exciting part of the COD4 experience.
The reaction from the MW2 fanboy community was "What could possibly go wrong?".
Well, here's your answer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to defend IW or anything, because I think that they killed a lot of aspects of the game. But, I believe that in this case, the individuals are hosting the game vs. IW hosting it. Now, to what degree Steam / IW are involved in matchmaking I don't know.
Now, I have been surprised that the setup works at all. But, it does work, for now. But man, if something goes wrong, everyone in your party has to leave, you have to send invites out, etc.... It would have been much simpler to just included dedicat
Re: (Score:2)
This would be the case if the publishers of COD4 had the same attitude as EA. EA ruthlessly release yearly versions of games and drop the previous years. In the store at the weekend I noticed that I could still buy a new COD4 for the Xbox 360. There is no incentive to drop support for COD4 as they can still make money from downloadable maps on Xbox live. Likewise the same will be true for MW2.
EA's entire sports business model is based on the fact that people will spend money to buy essentially the same game
Killing the second hand market (Score:5, Insightful)
This is probably just a ploy to kill off the second hand and discounted games market. Only people who pay full price for the latest update get to play online.
This is why... (Score:2)
...the whole concept of 'renting' software (as the Forces of Evil would describe it) that needs validation from a company server, is bullshit.
You sell me a game at $50-$60 price point, I want to own it forever, and have the media to install it when I want without requiring some crappy check-in procedure. You claim I'm only 'renting' it? Then 'rent' it to me at a rental price-point, like $10.
some needs to make there own PC NFL and NHL game a (Score:2)
some needs to make there own PC NFL and NHL game and let the courts take up the lock in to ea games.
There are not makeing a pc game so there may be a way under the law to have a pc NFL game.
Where to even start with that idea (Score:2)
1. The NFL licensing regime is 100% legal.
2. EA paid a king's ransom several years ago to gain full control of the NFL games license.
So, in order to do what you're suggesting, a company would have to be prepared to go to war with the NFL over established law. Not to mention, if the NFL backed down, they would then be sued by EA for breach of contract.
And yeah, the consumer loses. God knows Madden is one of the most stale NFL franchises out there. And the NFL 2K games were just starting to peak when EA
Tarnished and rotten to the core (Score:3)
A few days ago there was a link to an article about the most 'tarnished' tech companies. I suggested EA, because they used to be the very best of the best, and now they're...this.
Re:List of games (Score:4, Funny)
I'm not games, so I presume that I don't have to follow the following format? Good thing too, because I can't make sense from that directive.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but if "You are" games then the shutting down of servers should be a little more frightening.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Madden '07 sold 2 million copies the first week it was available [videogamesblogger.com]. Microsoft claimed to have logged 228 years worth of game time played on their servers in the same time frame.
Re: (Score:2)
He means now...
Do without football (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Totally! Just go out and play for real.
Didn't RTFA, but can't you keep playing the game alone, or with your friends in the confort of your home, just not on the internet?
What fun is it fighting random newbs on the internet anyway ?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Because starting in February, if you want to play "football" with your friends, you must pay licensing fees to NFL. And anyone watching your game must pay royalties to NBC.
Re: (Score:2)
With EA holding the exclusive license for both NFL and FIFA, that means we just get one shitty "official roster" game per year rather than seven.
Imagine a world in which those shitty games then didn't make money. Why, maybe all the ridiculous amounts of money spent on giving Madden 11 more shoelace detail and graphical advertising textures on the knocked-out teeth could go instead into making some interesting and fun games.
You want to play football? Go outside. Grab a ball. Find some friends. They're probab
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you live? (Score:3, Insightful)
I never understood why people play soccer games anyways. Why people watch soccer is already mysterious enough to me, but remotely understandable; but why the hell would you play a game which imitates something you could easily do with a bunch of friends (or even strangers) somewhere outside, for cheap? I'm not a big soccer player, but I sure know that regardless of how bad I am, I'm gonna have more fun playing *actual* soccer than some strange video game copy of it.
Wow, where do you live? Terrific weather year-round, eh? And the days are always long enough that after you get home from work there's still plenty of daylight left for your soccer game! And all those strangers you pick up for your soccer games are really friendly and never care when you dork out and let the other team win.
Even forgetting the fact that it sometimes isn't (for most people) more fun to play soccer in the real than to play a computer game, I'd just guess that the answer to your question is "A
Re:Do without football (Score:4, Insightful)
That same argument can be made about the vast majority of realistic video games.
FPS? Go join the military. Guitar Hero? Join a band. Fighting game? Go take MMA classes. Madden? Go play Football. Soccer game? Go outside and play soccer.
Naturally, if you give it more than the most superficial consideration - you'd be able to see that there is a world of difference between turning on a game and pressing 'play' and doing it in real life. You also make the incorrect assumption that everyone who enjoys video games is physically able to participate in the real-world physical version.
I can turn on FIFA 09 and play for 30 minutes after work. I'd be hard pressed to organize a game of soccer with 22 of my friends. I'd be even more hard pressed to play a full season of soccer with the World Cup as my goal.
First, the in-game players are designed to emulate the abilities of real world, *professional* players. 99.9999% of the population cannot play on that level. Second, there is dramatically different levels of risk associated with the two tasks. Playing soccer in real life is far more dangerous than on the video game. I broke my arm playing soccer, I've never done that playing a video game. Third, you've got logistic issues.....you need a place to play, you need goals, you need nets, you need gear, you should really have a ref. Those things aren't free. And if you want to have any sort of structure - with teams and scores - you'll need insurance.
I played on a local Rugby team around here for a season a few years after college. It was fun - but we were part of a league and the dues to cover the insurance, pay the ref, and hold a field were not cheap. And that's not addressing the costs of the uniform, the gear, nor the travel (nor the liquor afterwords, but that's a different story).
Bottom line is - you are talking about two things that are completely different. They aren't mutually exclusive. They are only superficially related. Not liking a type of video game is fine. Liking a real-world equivalent is fine. But advocating that the 'real world' version is a good replacement for the video game really misses the point of video games.
Re: (Score:2)
With EA holding the exclusive license for both NFL and FIFA, I guess you're just asking the world to do without football video games. Do I understand you correctly?
Only without officially trademark-licensed football video games. You're still free to make games that don't use the names NFL and FIFA, and don't contain players whose names are owned by those organisations.
Re: (Score:2)
You're still free to make games that don't use the names NFL and FIFA
Which of those has been a commercial success in the past couple years? Or by "you" do you mean a free software project as opposed to a commercial/proprietary project?
Re:The only people who have anything to whine abou (Score:5, Insightful)
If you buy their games you deserve nothing less.
No, you still deserve better. However, you should also have known better.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It does have limits, though, doesn't it?
What if you park your car in a secure area without bills on the dash? Some might argue that if you walked everywhere you went you could have avoided this crime, and therefore you reap what you sew.
The fact you can make choices does not obviate the ability of others to do so, ergo nor does it the responsibility.
Boiled all the way down, this mentality opens the door to arguments such as, "You should have known he was a rapist, and you deserved it because you dress like
You reap what you sow. (Score:3, Funny)
We're talking farmers, not tailors, folks.
Sow: plant seeds.
Reap: harvest crops.
Sew: stitching cloth together.
Reap: Huh?
Good grief, kids these days. GET OFF MY VOCABULARY!
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know the publishers of the CD's you listen to? Do you know the publishers of the movies you watch?
Why should you know the publisher of a game you play?
p.s. I thought Microsoft ran all the game servers on their X360 platform? Don't they have some kind of requirements for support of those servers?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh why are you so irate about the rootkits?
"Most people, I think, don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it."
--quote [arstechnica.com] Thomas Hesse, President Sony Global Digital Business, concerning the Sony Rootkit fuckup.
Sadly, he's right. Most don't know, don't care and only see what they want to see. Sure, they'll cry afterwards when the whole thing blows up in their face and blame Sony, the world and of course those evil pirates for it, but they don't care, don't listen and most of all, don't
Re:Some thoughts (Score:5, Insightful)
(soapbox alert) So why even play these games at all? What do you get after an hour of playing video games, besides a headache and high blood pressure?
Troll.
Why not go play an instrument, or play sports for real, or do something to improve yourself or the rest of the human race?
I have a game console and a mountain bike. My friend the football coach plays Madden. Grow up already.
Re:Some thoughts (Score:5, Interesting)
Its a short sited probably ultimately self defeating goal. I was listening to PBS business report just last night and they were interviewing some economics professors who were discussing how the move to always maximize share holder value has not actually lead to better share holder returns over the longer time period of the past two decades.
They also pointed out one company P&G pretty well stayed on the build new business and protect the customers perception of value, noting that it outperformed the market over those two decades. Now obviously you'd need to go through alot more data to reach sound conclusions.
I do think there is enough evidence out there that a longer term view eventually yeilds better returns. We should try and break the 18mo CEO cycle.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We should try and break the 18mo CEO cycle.
A good way to start would be to NOT give $100 Million to every failed CEO as you're kicking his ass out the door.
Re: (Score:2)
The argument will be that while 07 & 08 are no longer worth supporting, they contain code and other technologies used in 10, and so being forced to release that code will be detrimental to them.
I'm not saying I agree, in fact I agree with you in spirit at least - anything that is discontinued and no longer available, I think, really should pass into the public domain. I just don't think it's as clear-cut in this case as you'd like it to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guess they need more profit, and putting to spite their existing customers is certainly not in the way of their attempts to make more profit.
Then again, when you hear about EA's policies towards developers, is it surprising? [salon.com]
The first time a company screws up, is not it's last. Companies don't change their spots, and EA is no exception.
Re:2009 was last year, move with the times (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This is really all kinds of awesome. Not only will they release a new (whatever sport) game every year, they will now shut down all but the latest for online play. It is GENIUS I tell you!
What ever happened to EA's "We will stop being evil, we swear" thing they said a while back? I remember the followed it for a few months. I guess they then realized that the vast majority of their customers are slack jawed idiots, not because they play sports games (as much as I find them uninteresting), but because wil
Re:2009 was last year, move with the times (Score:5, Insightful)
one more reason to avoid EA games.
One more reason to avoid any game that depends on its publisher's servers. If I want to play Quake online I still can, and that came out well over ten years ago.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:2009 was last year, move with the times (Score:4, Interesting)
one more reason to avoid EA games.
One more reason to avoid any game that depends on its publisher's servers. If I want to play Quake online I still can, and that came out well over ten years ago.
4x4 Evo2 came out 10 years ago and uses private servers. But they publisher let the community take them over and it still works. But EA doesn't understand that kind of loyalty, and would never do it. It is why they will never get my money.
Re:2009 was last year, move with the times (Score:4, Insightful)