Is Bethesda becoming another EA?

[SajuukKhar]

I could spend 2-3 hours in the Soul Cairn, and a similar amount of time in The Forgotten Vale.....

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I don't think Steam was "DRM pure and simple", it was introduced at the same time at the ability to download games and for a time you could buy and play Valve games without needing to use Steam at all. It's not like Games for Windows Live or Ubi-suck DRM that is JUST THERE with all copies of the game to restrict you and give nothing in return.

And considering how DRM came before Steam and publishers were demanding DRM, wouldn't it be better to ave a DRM system that works and is reliable than secur-rom.

Is Valve really being selfish - in the sense that Digital RIGHTS management implies - for implementing a comprehensive anti-cheating system as VAC?

I'm not saying Steam as DRM is necessarily a bad thing. If we have to have DRM (and considering the regularity with which I sing CD Projekt's praises, where I stand on the matter should be obvious) then Steam and Steamworks serve as the best model currently available. It's far from perfect but it's probably the best balance we'll get when it comes to balancing consumer and publisher/developer demands and still maintain widespead industry support.

Actually, I retract that. Steamworks is the same annoying 'always online' DRM that we ***** about but Steam itself adds enough convenience and customer services to act as a soothing icepack after the DRM kick-in-the-goolies. It's not that Valve is pro-consumer, they're not, they're just not anti-consumer... they just seem pro-consumer because much of the rest of the publishing and distro end of the industry could be accurately if uncharitably described as 'rabidly anti-consumer'.

" they have the influence to do so anyway, so that's what we get."

Influence with who? The politicians, with unions, with the public opinion, with publishers, with microsoft/sony/nintendo?!?

Influence with the Publishers who are still very reliant on physical retail for a bulk of their sales... and as a follow on effect, influence with Distributors.

"once digital distro has matured enough on consoles to warrant widespread adoption, you watch the publishers and distributors turn on the physical retailers to muscle them to the periphery."

The problem is that is the worst way that Digital Distro can become mainstream on consoles, not in service of the customers but pandering to the greed of the shareholders who demand increased profits above all else. I fucking hate the shareholder model, it's like a flock of sheep making a deal with a pack of wolves.

Funny you should mention that... You seen the people on the Zenimax board? Mostly reps of venture capital firms, the ultimate expression of shareholders.

Anyway, when has anything been introduced to the console ecology for the actual benefit of the consumer (rather than just promoted as such)? It isn't that there aren't companies out there that don't want to, it's that they can't get past the gatekeepers in the form of the console manufacturers. It's the biggest drawback to the closed ecology of consoles.

You could also argue that no large corporate concerns have done anything for the benefit of the consumer in the PC ecology, and you'd be right, but because of the open ecology it allows for smaller, possibly more idealistic, companies to jump in and get their product/service/whatever into action.

Regardless, even if it is the worst possible way for DD to gain widespread adoption on consoles, and I have no doubt it is, it is the way the manufacturers and publishers are going to go about it.

 

[l0ckd0wn]

I could be off here, but I think I join the general consensus (that I gathered at least) and say 'No, Bethesda is not acting like EA,' by any stretch of the imagination.

Even after reading a couple pages, I don't know how people can make the comparison...

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Yeah, gamer entitlement all over.

It's been said before, but BethSoft and Zenimax are obligated BY LAW to defend their IP. If, one of their properties could even vaguely be confused for something else, it's not their right - it's their DUTY as a legal entity to defend their property. I'm pretty sure nobody at ZeniMax had any serious beef with Mojang, and I remember the attitude of everyone involved as being pretty laid-back. The whole thing really felt like someone was going "Ho-hum, this is standard procedure, no disrespect meant to Mojang!" and absolutely not like a case of long-toothed lawyers pouncing on the poor multi-million indie dev.

The problem is copyright law is still made so you can choose to initiate a lawsuit on the subject. Enter EA's general practices, copyright trolls like Tim Langdell et al.

As for the price point, I consider it to be fair. Minecraft was fifteen bucks when I snagged it in Alpha, and none of the Fallout 3 or New Vegas DLC packs came close to echoing a full retail price. Maybe it's just me, but twenty bucks is two airport paperbacks or one hardcover, or a decent dinner in a non-family-oriented five-star restaurant.

It really isn't that much. All things considered, it's a lot less offensive than paying five bucks for extra dye options in Fable 3. Even Oblivion's horse armor DLC didn't come close to that.

 

[squid5580]

Pretty sure every company is doing shotty business practices like EA. EA just does it the most. Just wish more people would do something about it.

Is it they do it the most? Or is it they are just open about it and not hiding it like the rest?

The way I see it is at least EA has the courtesy to whisper their name in my ear first.