It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Even without the god-awful DRM, Sim City 4 would still be the high point of the series by leaps and bounds. Largely because the maps are big enough to create actual cities and the region view doesn't end up looking absolutely retarded, what with huge amounts of open space between handfuls of skyscrapers packed together in tiny little squares.
avatar
Hesusio: Even without the god-awful DRM, Sim City 4 would still be the high point of the series by leaps and bounds. Largely because the maps are big enough to create actual cities and the region view doesn't end up looking absolutely retarded, what with huge amounts of open space between handfuls of skyscrapers packed together in tiny little squares.
Not to mention the pre-rendered buildings and lots in Simcity 4 actually look better and have hell alot more detail than the buildings in this iteration.
avatar
P1na: with all DLC bundled up GOG-style.
Like they did with Omerta?
Post edited March 08, 2013 by Miaghstir
avatar
P1na: with all DLC bundled up GOG-style.
avatar
Miaghstir: Like they did with Omerta?
Yes, exactly like that. Offline, without clients and with an eventual full version. I don't care if they give the option of buying DLCs separately before the GOTY version is out as long as we do get upgraded to that version automatically when it's out.
avatar
P1na: as long as we do get upgraded to that version automatically when it's out.
If, indeed, that will happen. We don't know that yet (or, rather, I don't know).
avatar
P1na: as long as we do get upgraded to that version automatically when it's out.
avatar
Miaghstir: If, indeed, that will happen. We don't know that yet (or, rather, I don't know).
Well, there's no small amount of wishful thinking on my part, but I do believe it will happen. I've been asking for a blue to confirm, but I came to realize it won't happen because it's not really up to them. It's up to what the developer decides to do, and if the developer doesn't play ball it would be very bad PR to be caught unable to fullfill their promise. So I don't think we'll see any blue comment seriously on the matter, other than teasing us with some ambiguous or funny remark.

What I do believe they will keep saying is that old quote about "doing everything they can to bring users the most complete version available". The same way we got automatic updates for old missing expansions when they became available, the same way they update their own titles free of charge, I would hope to see my copy of any game with DLC updated to gold when the game makes it into the "old games" category.

I think it makes sense: instead of not selling the game at all until the complete package is out, you release the base game and DLCs when they come out. If you don't buy the DLCs, you are buying the complete package ahead of time and get access to the main game in the meantime. I you buy DLCs, well, you're getting access to content you like enough to pay for years before it would normally be available in GOG.
I notice SimCity 2000 is selling rather well now
People need their SimCity fix :)
avatar
SovietSharkey: I notice SimCity 2000 is selling rather well now
People need their SimCity fix :)
Probably buying it out of spite :P


Also let this be a lesson to all publishers that DRM will only last so long until gamers had enough of shit like this:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/03/08/simcity-burning-a-warning-to-microsoft-sony-and-all-publishers-on-the-dangers-of-always-online-drm
And SimCity2000 is currently the top seller on GOG now.
People must REALLY hate what EA did to the new SimCity's DRM.
avatar
P1na: I think it makes sense: instead of not selling the game at all until the complete package is out, you release the base game and DLCs when they come out. If you don't buy the DLCs, you are buying the complete package ahead of time and get access to the main game in the meantime. I you buy DLCs, well, you're getting access to content you like enough to pay for years before it would normally be available in GOG.
I think it is silly to think you would get game content (ie. any DLC released for the game after you bought the base game) fully free of charge afterwards, just because you decided not to buy it.

Since slippery-slopes are hip, that is like saying that not buying the base game at all should give you later access to the whole game free of charge, just because you didn't buy the game content earlier. Ie. you should get all your game content free of charge, as long as you just wait a bit.


That said, I think the game publishers should wisen up with the pricing of DLC for aging games. At point where you can get the full package with DLCs for the same price or even less as the base game without DLC, or the DLCs, the price of the DLC (if bought separately) should also go down, a lot.

This is probably the main reason I'm shy to buy any game if there is still DLC content coming. It just feels silly that it doesn't cost any more buy the whole package (base game + DLCs) all over again, instead of buying the missing DLCs or expansion packs separately. THQ games used to be very bad at this, two examples I like to use from Steam side are e.g. Titan Quest, Saints Row 3 and the Darksiders 1-2 franchise. For example Titan Quest:

- Titan Quest (base game): 6.99€ (okay, I have this already...)

- Titan Quest expansion pack (Immortal Throne): 9.99€ (uh, the expansion pack costs more than the base game? Whatever...)

- Titan Quest Gold (incl. both above): 9.99€ (WTF? So it makes no sense to buy the missing expansion pack separately anymore?)

Things like this just make me feeling stupid for having bought the games before all the game content was available. But this does not mean GOG (or Steam) should delay the release of the base games, DLCs or expansion packs; it just means I need to wait out until the complete game content is available. Just like I waited before I bought certain GOG games with missing expansion packs (Alpha Centauri etc.), or I'm still refusing to buy Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon from GOG due to missing expansion packs.

Same question: do I feel GOG should not have released Rainbox Six and Ghost Recon at all until they have secured the expansion packs too? No I don't feel so.
avatar
timppu: I think it is silly to think you would get game content (ie. any DLC released for the game after you bought the base game) fully free of charge afterwards, just because you decided not to buy it.
Is it really silly? Think about it.

When the game is new

a) preorder/buy the game because it looks interesting (50€)
a1) I really liked it, I buy DLC (+30€)
a2) I liked it, but not enough to buy DLC
a3) I didn't like it, and leave it be

b) Looks interesting, so I buy on sale (25€). b1, b2 and b3 like before.

c) I don't buy because I expect DLC and want to make one purchase with all included

When the game becomes old and the gold edition comes out

d) I buy the gold edition (20€) as I didn't have the game before

e) I buy the gold edition despite having the base game (20€)

f) I buy the DLC I was missing to custom build my own gold edition by hand (about 10€? probably more)


I think this are about all the different approaches you can take towards buying the game. A lot of people have complained here about DLC because they wanted to take the c) approach, until they could do d). Those are missed sales, until the eventual release of the gold edition and that's if the potential buyers even remember the game at that point. Gamers tend to have short attention spans, after all.

But let's focus on older games. I understand publishers/devs wanting to make money and hoping for e) and f), but let's be real: just how many people will actually spend money to get DLCs for a game years after having been into it, when you didn't want to while you were really into it? I suppose some a2) people might have increased their income and can afford DLCs they couldn't before, but other than that...I can't see it happening.

Now thing of what I suggested: upgrade people with the base game to gold edition for free. You still get all the money from a1) and b1) people. However, the people on c) may also buy the game at launch, because they know they are in fact buying the complete package ahead of time. And an a) or even b) is not only more money than d), but it's also money that comes early while the profit still counts.

I feel I'm not making myself clear, so I'll leave it at this: selling more early on is probably better for a studio than late sales, and I doubt DLC sells well later on anyway, so I honestly think the free gold update is a good idea. It's of course up to the publisher, not GOG, but I would like to hear GOG will be pushing publishers towards this as much as they reasonably can. It allows them to get DLC sale money without compromising on getting full packages.
Eh, this one is a little bit more complete....
inb4 simcity extended cut edition getting offline mode
avatar
liquidsnakehpks: inb4 simcity extended cut edition getting offline mode
And the saddest part of this is that you could be right....