Ce sujet est fermé
And that's part © of my "OMG EA are so short sighted only developing for consoles". And why I think Bethesda are marketing genuises.
Skyrim was fundamentally borken (typo, but keeping it; it works) in many cases on release. It was buggy and the UI was freaking ridiculous. But they allow, nay, encourage modding, so the fanbase had it fixed fairly quickly. It is a part of Bethesda's EULA to that anything the fans do also belongs to them, so they very quickly adapted many of these fixes for future patches and DLC. They had a "release date" that was not a long enough lead-time, too--but here's the thing. From a totally cynical viewpoint, it didn't matter. "We've got bugs but the fanbase will fix it in post." By allowing modding, Bethesda have a huge pool of free labour that are looking at the code with fresh eyes and seeing things the people who have been embroiled in it for years will skim over. They see easy, uncomplicated fixes where someone who has been stuck in the code for years goes too deep.
Kind of like that "impossible" PC walk toggle, eh, Mssrs Laidlaw and Darrah?
You cannot emulate another company's success without being totally aware of what has made that success, first. Allowing open source and modding for PCs extends the shelf life, and, thus, sales life, of your games, which is what Bethesda did. EAware have made it clear they wanted to reach for Skyrim-like sales, but in using the "NO" approach, EAware have limited (there's that word again) their sales and will never make that goal. Mods extend replayability. Mods make people who bought first on console want to buy it again on PC (as in, my 16yo, who against my advice, bought Skyrim on console on release, and then again when he wanted to play on PC with mods. Or a more salient example of a much older friend--who should have known better--in North Carolina who did exactly the same thing with Origins. I mentioned the Morrigan fixes, my (unreleased) Zevran "jaw fix" morph, and the Alistair mods at Nexus [holy Maker and DaliahLynne's addons. My gods!], and she bought a second copy of it, on PC, because the console version couldn't have them. She then decided the PC UI -- ironically -- was friendlier and she still plays Origins on PC). Mods force people to buy the DLC better than forcing MP in an essentially SP game ever could. "You want to use x mod? Well, the author used the Hearthstone In Haven DLC when creating it, so you have to buy that even if you didn't intend to." And the fanbase does all of this for free, in their spare time, so what they make, they make from the love of it, and it turns out so much better than official stuff, often, so of course you buy the DLC to use the mod.
It also keeps a base educated about gaming, improving a company's employment pool.
(Side note, has anyone seen the DA2 in-game house wear mods made by Ellise? I've used these in-game since they were released, because I can't stand to look at that... skirt... thing... you gave female Hawkes. I don't know who Bioware has making at-home pajamas and "finery" but honestly, Bioware? No. Just, no. First DA2, now the travesty in DA:I? WTF is that garbage you're making my Inquistor wear?? I know it's a bug--but hey, that's another bug already solved by Cheatengine. And yet you guys are still "looking into it").
Sims 2, I still play, because I totally modded it out to exactly what I wanted (and given at least one S2 EP included content from a modthesims uploader, you'd think EA would have learned this). Sims 4? Limits my choices to only the developer's vision (which is not good in any sandbox game even if the developers are absolutely brilliant, because the player's imagination will always extend past a development team's), so eff it.
EA are so short sighted it boggles the mind. I am totally anti piracy (I make some of my income from IP and royalties) but when are companies going to realise that : 1) "potential income lost" from piracy is not the same as actual income lost, and that 2) these anti piracy measures are losing companies more money than actual piracy is? And that, psychologically, players are more likely to pirate from a company they despise? (And anyone in marketing knows--or should--that a customer's psychology is the first thing you should think about when thinking about sales. That's so important it's virtually all that matters).
Potentially, with an active, and loyal, PC fanbase, a game can sell 2 units -- 1 console, 1 PC. Potentially only, of course; you have to take into account the fact that there are console players who don't care about replayability and PC players who will buy first on PC and leave it at that. But the money saved on having that same PC fanbase fixing your mistakes and re-adding content you had to cut for time--especially if you allow it, and then you adapt it for future patches--plus the shortened lead time because you know you'll be using that fanbase (as Bethesda does) to boost your game, and thus its sales? And the enforced DLC sales from mod-making, especially when its the mods that truly make the game (as is often the case on any sandbox-style game, which DA is heading into)? And not having a bunch of PC players return the game because you didn't treat them like second-rate crap--when they were the fanbase that built your company to what it was to start with? Immeasurable.
Seriously. Bioware alienating its PC fanbase is like... oh, I don't know.... Joss Whedon telling his Buffy fans they can all go shyte bricks and never watch his stuff again. [To be clear for anyone in the tl;dr crowd who are skimming my wall of text: HE DID NOT DO THAT. That's a simile, an example, not something that's happened].
But that's EA. A bunch of execs who apparently don't actually understand the mentality of their own market. They may like to take their heads out of their own arses and actually get to know their market. They'd make more money.
As such, it really behooves EAware to start communicating with us properly again, take their lumps, and reverse this silly policy.
This woman speaks the trooth!! Go get 'em Girl!
Retour en haut
