Boy would it ever be a bad day to own only a PC. First of all, Command and Conquer has a long history stretching back to the origins of RTS games, and has been around for years, known both for it’s ridiculously campy single player and it’s competitive multiplayer.
A little while back, it was announced that the game would have continuous player progression along the lines of Call of Duty 5, get a kill in single player and you’d get experience for multiplayer. A downside of that is the requirement to have an internet connection 100% of the time, even if you have no interest in multiplayer. GamePolitics points out the violated right from the Gamer’s Bill of Rights:
“Gamers shall have the right to demand that a single-player game not force them to be connected to the Internet every time they wish to play.”
The Gamer’s Bill of Rights comes from developer Stardock, famed for putting the happiness and experience of their customers ahead of convoluted DRM for the sake of security. Publishers have been kicking around PC gamers for years, between DRM and as GamePolitics says “It’s time for PC gamers to make some noise about this nonsense.”
After the Spore debacle of last year I’d have thought EA would have learned their lesson.
Source: GamePolitics
Get an Early Taste of Command and Conquer 4
Facebook Dragon Age game going offline
Medal of Honor: Warfighter gets a new trailer
EA Origin offers free distribution to crowd-funded games, Wasteland 2 signs up
Battlefield 3 Premium gives early DLC access
Activision tried to hack employees' devices, trial ends in settlement
“Boy would it ever be a bad day to own only a PC.”
Being a bit exaggerate aren’t we? I’ve yet to have a problem with “only” PC gaming be it with DRM or any other issues. People tend to make it a bigger deal that it truly is.
By the time the game comes out it will probably be dealt with and if not who cares? Do you think COD 5 for 360 did not have the same feature?
Login or Register to reply.
Makou (July 17th, 2009)
I don’t understand all the hoopla…..If someone puts out a game that has things I do not care for or just plain sucks, I DO NOT BUY IT. I don’t care if you say Im missing out. I will never again give NINTENDO any of my coin, not buy anything else in the Battlefield series. I don’t even play the supposedly good Battlefield Heroes game and that’s free.
Forums are good to complain in, but if you really want developers to listen, don’t pay for inferior products EVER.
Login or Register to reply.
UnkleBeavis (July 17th, 2009)
I’m not interested in a game that always requires an Internet connection. Microsoft’s product activation requiring an Internet connection (or phone call) is irritating enough and that can be justified by being an Operating System. A single game that runs on Windows requiring it all the time.
Login or Register to reply.
Dirk (July 17th, 2009)
It would be kinda odd for a C&C title to require online connectivity. The multiplayer was great, but I realy enjoyed the single player campaigns. I’d say it’s too early to freak out over this whole online-only issue before learning more about the C&C team’s intentions.
There are many great multiplayer online games and they don’t infringe on gamer “rights”. That is just silly. It’s like saying my production studio does not have the right to develop and produce an online-only title. If an online audience is my target audience, I sure as heck do. There are reasons for this and it usually has to do with befitting the intended game experience.
Login or Register to reply.
Mastershredder (July 17th, 2009)