Topic: HOW NOT TO POST ON THE NWR FORUMS

[broodwars]

Wrote a big post, then hit backspace while editing and it all went away.

Using Firefox?
http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/751749
Disable that mother'.

I don't even know why that's an option.

THANK YOU! That function's been the bane of my posting experience for years! 

[Pixelated Pixies]

Wrote a big post, then hit backspace while editing and it all went away.

Using Firefox?
http://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/751749
Disable that mother'.

I don't even know why that's an option.

It's the dumbest thing ever. That has happened to me on so many occasions.

[Oblivion]

My browser does it natively, without an addon.

[oohhboy]

You want Simcity 2013 GIFs? You got it!.







Bonus:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQs4WIxXQog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yySa34R0D_4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHdyzx_ecbQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_ufAd79bOA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFKKIH2WasM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcEaHT9mt-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IECDGp_lHTU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLC22aB7JPs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g418BSF6XBQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d0b41H-Lnk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcRI9_oXSCs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgvhKPXzYcs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDeSRdHvefw

Voted Sim City 2013 if you haven't guessed. I don't see SC getting "Ironed out" as they will have to reconsider the very underlying design foundations and assumptions on which the game is built on. Using Glass box was a very poor decision and the box is smashed.

Sure if you want a Facebook game, yeah this mess might be acceptable, but Simcity is better than that, it's more than that. If this is acceptable, I will be happy to never ever see another Simcity game ever made again. Take out to the back of the barn and shoot it.

Kind of mean spirited to hope people lose their jobs. I mean ignoring the online debacle and the fact that you can only make cites that existed in the 1950s Sim City got pretty good review. That's more of a EA wanting control of everything rather than being a Maxis problem.

Also the "Good" Reviews were based on a "Closed" review session at EA where they only got several hours of play. not long enough for the illusion that is glass box to shatter. Also stop white knighting for companies, you are helping to maintain the status quo. 10 Year old games have better AI than this with a fraction of the CPU power and in much larger cities with functioning economic relationships.

It's no more mean spirited than it is unfortunate. There was this restaurant I went to once to get some lunch. The owner/cook was having trouble after a year in business. I felt sorry for him and in some way I wanted to help, so I sat down to talk to him. But after taking the food home and eating it, I knew why he was in trouble. His food wasn't any good. I wanted to tell him, but I knew it wouldn't help and the situation was terminal. Sometimes to move people on to better thing, they have lose their jobs and businesses.

In the case of EA, you can rightly tell them to get the **** out.

[UncleBob]

My browser does it natively, without an addon.

Does what?  Lets you disable the backspace key without an add-on?  So does FireFox.  I linked to how to do it above.

[Ian Sane]

That gif of all the people walking in a rectangle looks like some sort of political protest.  The train one looks like some of the dumb bugs in Transport Tycoon.  Anyone play that old game?  Trains will turn on intersections and cause problems by being on the wrong track.  Trains can't turn!  How the hell does one even introduce such a bug?

Didn't know about "closed" reviews for this game.  That's not a legitimate review at all.

[TJ Spyke]

It is a legit review, and it happens all the time in the industry. I know oohboy is anti-EA (to the point he is rooting for hundreds of people to lose their jobs), but to go so far as to essentially claim none of the good reviews count? I guess he thinks that if somebody dares like a game that he doesn't, it doesnt count.

[oohhboy]

Back on your horse? Closed reviews and embargos are a scam designed to snag as many first day sales and preorders before a turd gets exposed.

Even a closed review that had originally given the game 9.5 had to corect their score to a 4.

There is no point keeping something going is all it foes is produce grabage.

[UncleBob]

A closed review is like giving you a bite of a pizza.

Sure, I may give you the best tasting bite - but the rest could be covered with feces.

It's a disgusting practice and any reviewer worth giving any credit to would refuse to partake in one.

[Louieturkey]

It is a legit review, and it happens all the time in the industry. I know oohboy is anti-EA (to the point he is rooting for hundreds of people to lose their jobs), but to go so far as to essentially claim none of the good reviews count? I guess he thinks that if somebody dares like a game that he doesn't, it doesnt count.

The only way they are legit is if the reviewer reveals that they reviewed the game in an EA controlled environment and didn't actually play it online how everyone else would have to play it.  Even then, those reviews become irrelevant.

When the final release product reviews are so much worse than the beta closed environment reviews, you have to question their validity.  Eurogamer Sweden gave the game a 100 perfect score. Eurogamer proper and the German branch gave it a 40.  One played it in an EA controlled environment.  Two played it after the game was released the same as everyone else who bought the game. 
Polygon is a good example of what has gone wrong with the game.  Polygon gave it a 9.5 originally (they played 50 hours or so and had a blast...on the beta version).  The day after publication, they dropped the score 8 based on the server issues.  Then, four days later, they dropped it to a 4 because the game had changed in a lot of ways that made it less fun.

EA has changed the game, which IMO makes the reviews of the beta version be irrelevant for the game in its current state.

[TJ Spyke]

Under that logic, ANY game that focuses on online (like MMOs, and many FPSs) should not be reviewed until after they launch since online will be vastly different in the wild vs. just playing other reviewers.

As for Polygon (who are a joke of a site, and why people consider them respectable is a mystery), they have changed their score twice, so they are not reliable. Like they dropped the score from a 8 to a 4 after EA temporarily (and EA made sure to say it was temporary) removed features while they stabilized the game? I wonder if Polygon will apologize and put the score back once those features are all returned? Some of them already have been restored.

[pokepal148]

Under that logic, ANY game that focuses on online (like MMOs, and many FPSs) should not be reviewed until after they launch since online will be vastly different in the wild vs. just playing other reviewers.

As for Polygon (who are a joke of a site, and why people consider them respectable is a mystery), they have changed their score twice, so they are not reliable. Like they dropped the score from a 8 to a 4 after EA temporarily (and EA made sure to say it was temporary) removed features while they stabilized the game? I wonder if Polygon will apologize and put the score back once those features are all returned? Some of them already have been restored.

then what should they do... they are expected to have reviews at launch. should they just say 'were not reviewing this game because of the online function'
the introduction of patches and online debacles like this have chaged the battlefield. and Polygon is the only site that is doing the right thing, changing the review score to reflect that.

[TJ Spyke]

If Polygon bumps the score back up (they said they dropped the score from 8 to 4 because EA removed features) now that EA is putting the features back in, then they will get some respect from me.

For games that dont require online, the scored doesnt need to be changed. If online is required, review the game ahead of time, and only change the score if online severely changes it (not just a little slow down because of server overload, dropping the score because of that destroys credibility of the reviewer).

[oohhboy]

Well, yes. A review in a controlled environment is going to be different than one in the wild. When a game goes wild the number of hours played goes up extremely quickly and flaws get exposed. The game mechanics influence the kind of community exists along with GM/Admin/Mod policies. An online game on the surface maybe all happy happy, but the community might be nothing but anguish and trolling. A game might be nothing but shooting each other into bloody paint jobs, but have a friendly community.

I ask what is your definition of what is "Respectable". Is NWR "Respectable"? IGN? Gamespot? CNN? FOX?.

The problems that SC 2013 has run much deeper than server issues. Fundamental relationships are broken. The Residential/commercial/Industry relationship is utterly broken. You can make a city with "1 million" citizens with nothing but residential zones, parks and no power or water or services. The simulation is fundamentally flawed with absolutely no bearing to reality which the previous games mimic.

[Louieturkey]

Under that logic, ANY game that focuses on online (like MMOs, and many FPSs) should not be reviewed until after they launch since online will be vastly different in the wild vs. just playing other reviewers.

While this has nothing to do with MMOs since SC13 is not an MMO, I do believe there should be an updated review after a period of time that the game is out (although, after the first couple of months, the "professional" reviews become irrelevant and the community in the game ends up being the main voice that outsiders listen to).  Look at The Old Republic.  It got some good reviews when it first came out.  Then after a couple of months, the community in the game lost interest and it became boring and it started to lose money.  WoW had great reviews when it first came out.  Blizzard kept pumping resources into it and kept it interesting. So people kept playing it.  An updated review for it would have said it was still a great game. An updated review for TOR would have most likely been lower.

[pokepal148]

Online gaming is a standard and any major issues with that should be held accountable. if it means lowering the score to reflect that
DO IT!! a broken online system doesn't warrant a metacritic bonus.

For games that dont require online, the score doesnt need to be changed. If online is required, review the game ahead of time, and only change the score if online severely changes it (not just a little slow down because of server overload, dropping the score because of that destroys credibility of the reviewer).

So if a new halo game comes out with a broken online system it shouldn't change the score because you still have a campaign mode that you can get through in an hour?

[TJ Spyke]

Yes. Unless online is the main focus of the game, then a weak online system should not hurt the overall score of the game. Online is not standard with every game, nor should it be for most.

For your specific example, I would scoff at that review. They are reviewing the game, which is the campaign mode. Yes, online is very popular in the Halo games, but they are not vital to the actual game and shouldn't be a factor in the score.

[pokepal148]

Yes. Unless online is the main focus of the game, then a weak online system should not hurt the overall score of the game. Online is not standard with every game, nor should it be for most.

For your specific example, I would scoff at that review. They are reviewing the game, which is the campaign mode. Yes, online is very popular in the Halo games, but they are not vital to the actual game and shouldn't be a factor in the score.

but it is, alot of people buy a game for it's online mode. Shouldn't reviewers make sure that the main reason people buy the game is held accountable.

what about Subspace Emmisary? You can put the same logic in there. it's not vital to the main game so reviews shouldn't account for it.

[TJ Spyke]

Um, Subspace Emissary is part of the main game. In fact, it's how you unlock a lot of things. So that comparison is faulty.

Unless online is the main purpose of the game (or is required), then it shouldnt factor in. Should they mention it in the review? Sure, but it shouldnt effect the score. And what is the time frame for these reviewers playing revisionism history with their review score? Can a reviewer go back and dock their score for Madden NFL 07 because EA shut down the servers and there is no way to play it online now (and I think 07 had an achievement that required it)?

[pokepal148]

Um, Subspace Emissary is part of the main game. In fact, it's how you unlock a lot of things. So that comparison is faulty.

Unless online is the main purpose of the game (or is required), then it shouldnt factor in. Should they mention it in the review? Sure, but it shouldnt effect the score. And what is the time frame for these reviewers playing revisionism history with their review score? Can a reviewer go back and dock their score for Madden NFL 07 because EA shut down the servers and there is no way to play it online now (and I think 07 had an achievement that required it)?

it's a matter of relevance. nobody gives a crud about madden 07
but what is the 'main game' you say subspace is how you unlock things but then mention a madden 07 achievement(hypocrite) so that can't be the defining factor.
also characters can be unlocked through VS mode and nobody with a life cares about trophys(or stickers).
What about on a system level, should we not have complained about the wii's online because it's not a crucial part of the system?

[TJ Spyke]

You are connecting two dots that don't exist. The Madden mention was in regards to saying it's OK for a reviewer to go back and change their score. If you think it's OK for for a studio to go back and change their score based on online, what would be wrong with a reviewer going back and changing their score for something like Madden 07, now that you can't play it online or even get all of the achievements?

With Subspace Emissary, there is nothing preventing you from going back in 20 years and playing it. And if you ever played the Smash Bros. games, you would know how fun and interesting it is to unlock trophies. And I could say that nobody who has a life cares about something like leveling up in Call of Duty's online (especially as when online gets shut down for that, it all goes away. But with Smash, you will never lose that stuff).

[pokepal148]

You are connecting two dots that don't exist. The Madden mention was in regards to saying it's OK for a reviewer to go back and change their score. If you think it's OK for for a studio to go back and change their score based on online, what would be wrong with a reviewer going back and changing their score for something like Madden 07, now that you can't play it online or even get all of the achievements?

With Subspace Emissary, there is nothing preventing you from going back in 20 years and playing it. And if you ever played the Smash Bros. games, you would know how fun and interesting it is to unlock trophies. And I could say that nobody who has a life cares about something like leveling up in Call of Duty's online (especially as when online gets shut down for that, it all goes away. But with Smash, you will never lose that stuff).

again relevance. nobody cares about 07 and somebody who finds it in the bargain bin likely will not care that the online mode went offline

but when i'm paying near full price for the brand new halo game is when i want to know about every part of it's value, yes madden lost it's online mode, and it also lost its price point accordingly

and smash trophies are fun but the subspace exclusive trophy stand ones are just stupid to get

but you still haven't answered my question. what is the 'main game'

were getting so philosophical here and i still haven't touched another example i have (that you may prefer)

[UncleBob]

Here, guys.  I'll settle this for TJ using TJ's own words.

Yes. Unless online is the main focus of the game, then a weak online system should not hurt the overall score of the game.

According to the developers, online is a MAJOR focus of this game.

It’s fundamental to the vision we had for this SimCity. From the ground up, we designed this game with multiplayer in mind – using new technology to realize a vision of players connected in regions to create a SimCity that captured the dynamism of the world we live in; a global, ever-changing, social world.

So, Online was a major focus of this SIMCity - so a weak online system (one that's so bad it requires parts of the game to be disabled in order to allow the game to even work) should hurt the overall score... just as TJ said.

[pokepal148]

we were debating the merits of changing review scores in a broader scope and had teetered on the online aspect(and their importance in modern games). could somebody amputate the whole argument with your 'moderater voodoo'? this discussion deserves it's own thread tbh and i feel we're getting places

[pokepal148]

You want Simcity 2013 GIFs? You got it!.







Bonus:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQs4WIxXQog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yySa34R0D_4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHdyzx_ecbQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_ufAd79bOA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFKKIH2WasM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcEaHT9mt-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IECDGp_lHTU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLC22aB7JPs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g418BSF6XBQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d0b41H-Lnk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcRI9_oXSCs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgvhKPXzYcs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDeSRdHvefw

Voted Sim City 2013 if you haven't guessed. I don't see SC getting "Ironed out" as they will have to reconsider the very underlying design foundations and assumptions on which the game is built on. Using Glass box was a very poor decision and the box is smashed.

Sure if you want a Facebook game, yeah this mess might be acceptable, but Simcity is better than that, it's more than that. If this is acceptable, I will be happy to never ever see another Simcity game ever made again. Take out to the back of the barn and shoot it.

Kind of mean spirited to hope people lose their jobs. I mean ignoring the online debacle and the fact that you can only make cites that existed in the 1950s Sim City got pretty good review. That's more of a EA wanting control of everything rather than being a Maxis problem.

Also the "Good" Reviews were based on a "Closed" review session at EA where they only got several hours of play. not long enough for the illusion that is glass box to shatter. Also stop white knighting for companies, you are helping to maintain the status quo. 10 Year old games have better AI than this with a fraction of the CPU power and in much larger cities with functioning economic relationships.

It's no more mean spirited than it is unfortunate. There was this restaurant I went to once to get some lunch. The owner/cook was having trouble after a year in business. I felt sorry for him and in some way I wanted to help, so I sat down to talk to him. But after taking the food home and eating it, I knew why he was in trouble. His food wasn't any good. I wanted to tell him, but I knew it wouldn't help and the situation was terminal. Sometimes to move people on to better thing, they have lose their jobs and businesses.

In the case of EA, you can rightly tell them to get the **** out.

FLYING CARS!!!!