Obsidian: Forget "Gimmicks" Like On-Disc DLC

[ShindoL Shill]

wait, so we get DLC but i have to waste time actually downloading it?
i have a slow internet.
whatta wanker.

/some sarcasm.
just a wee bit though.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

You know what, Obsidian? You don't have great beta-testing, and that's your biggest flaw.

But I've held for a long time that every person and group has a certain number of flaws that they're required by some sort of universal law to have. That's the basic principle behind something being "Too good to be true." By and large, if something appears perfect, it's A) just good at hiding its flaw or B) possesses a hidden flaw that's going to be a horrible, horrible shock down the road.

Look at Valve: they release consistent and groundbreaking hits and amazingly balanced/popular multiplayer games...but they can't release a third installment in a series, as if some sort of demonic pact that gave them the aforementioned talents prevents them from doing so.

Obsidian...their games are notoriously buggy on day one, and we can all thank whatever for the predominance of internet access for the ability to patch them after day one. But you know what? They write great stories/characters, deliver experiences that keep you coming back for more, and if this article is any indicator, they are the paragons of capitalism: they believe that the way to keep people invested in a game is to make sure that the game has plenty to offer them.

This guy...assuming he's being honest, and I'm feeling uncharacteristically optimistic today, is what makes me happy amidst all the "New game only unlock" gimmicks bouncing around. He saw a problem with used games cutting into general sales, and rather than embracing the unscrupulous method of combating it, he redoubled his efforts to make his company's games worth keeping.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

wait, so we get DLC but i have to waste time actually downloading it?
i have a slow internet.
whatta wanker.

/some sarcasm.
just a wee bit though.

Fair enough. It does take a while to download, but that's what a download queue is great for. Just set your console to download 'em before you even plan to be playing them, and then go do whatever it was you were going to do. School, work, whatever: even a slow connection with all the New Vegas DLCs will finish while you're out doing what you had to do anyway.

 

[Michael Hirst]

Well done yes this is how you tackle used sales, make a game worth replaying that I won't want to trade in, I very rarely trade in because there are lots of games I will play again. RPG's barely ever get traded in by me unless I really hate them.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Yes I agree, the 300 hours I spent on New Vegas is testiment to that. You wanna cut down on used sales? Make games people don't want to trade in. Now if only Obsidian can ever release a game that has less holes than a termite infested house they would be the perfect developer

 

[everythingbeeps]

Obsidian's really not in a position to talk, here. Maybe spend less time tooting your own horn, more time making games that actually work.

 

[Dastardly]

I find Urquhart's words refreshing. Game developers should focus on making their games great so that people don't feel rewarded for turning them back in to rental or trade-in retailers. I'm all for Urquhart's plan, and I think the kinds of games that his company makes often last on players' shelves because of their depth and quality, not the gimmicks of codes and items.

I think it's an admirable sentiment, but it builds an incomplete case by ignoring certain realities:

1. Retailers that deal in used games are going to use other strategies to make sure people "feel rewarded" for turning them in, no matter how hard developers work to do the opposite.

2. Some people do this out of necessity. Yes, I'd love to keep Game X forever, but I need to trade it in to be able to afford Game Y.

3. Trade-in rate is not a measure of game quality per se. It is as much a function of player personality as anything.

4. Anything done to increase the quality of the game will also increase the quality of the traded-in copy. Right now, publishers simply want their new products to be able to compete with used copies of their products. They can't win that battle on price (ever), so they're trying to find ways of increasing the value of the new product without also increasing the value of the "competing" product.

What I mean by #4 is that the single-use codes are a potential solution to a different problem. No, they won't stop people from trading the games in, but we also have to recognize that people are going to do that as long as there's money in it. To these publishers, the first step is making the new product "worth more" than the used. As people choose new over used, the value of used copies will drop (as will the price). The secondhand market will still exist, but not dominate.

At the same time we can ask for an increase in the quality and replayability of the games... to a degree. Multiplayer will almost always taper off when the next sequel hits the market, for instance. And encouraging the style of replay-value the above quotes recommend will just lead to publishers "padding" the game with artificial choices and superficial branching. I think it's more important that we encourage publishers to reduce the per-copy cost of new games.

1. This will help players feel less forced into trading to afford new titles.
2. Players will feel less "risk" in buying new, potentially-bad titles.
3. This will alleviate the pressure many developers seem to feel to take a basic game concept and stretch it out until it's "worth $60," which rarely works. (X-Men: Destiny?)

 

[GonzoGamer]

Such a tactic can fit for both RPGs or hybrids like what Obsidian is used to crafting as well as more mainstream shooters. "I think each genre has a way to do it. Battlefield and Call of Duty have it in multiplayer with maps, rankings, leveling up, and unlocks. There are different things, but the idea is making people feel, 'I want to keep on playing it.'

...
Now, if only they could get rid of all the bugs ...

I probably would've lent New Vegas to fewer people had it not crashed constantly.

What's funny is that Battlefield 3 has (is primarily) multiplayer with rankings and leveling up and all that to encourage people to not trade it in yet that didn't stop them from locking the multiplayer behind online pass or whatever they call it. So someone renting or borrowing (someone who is not likely to spend that $10 on something they don't intend to keep), doesn't play the most addictive/compelling part of the game.

Is it me, or does that seem really counter-productive. Not to mention: I get the feeling EA was already making a hell of a lot of money before they started doing these schemes... even if there are fewer people this generation to buy Battlefield 3 than there would've been last gen.

I just hope that crap like that bights them in the ass hard enough that they will start to take Feargus' words seriously because it's not hurting the used game market as much as it's hurting the integrity of their products.

I just thought of another thing Feargus is saying (if somewhat between the lines): this ploy of telling the gamer they must pre-order/buy new lest they miss out on some of the game content seems really desperate...like they know their game sucks and need to hype as many people into buying it before word spreads that it sucks.

 

[Scow2]

You can't sell Pre-owned games if nobody owned the copy first. Therefore, the publishers need to get over their elitist asses regarding the Used Product market. Property transfer rights are the foundation of all economic rights.

I've only seen people trade in games in a limited number of circumstances, and none of them result in a "loss" of cash by the publisher:
1. They bought the game, didn't like it, so gave it to someone who does.
2. They need the money to buy a new game.
3. Their game has been rendered obsolete by a new one: Call of Duty trade-ins don't cost the producer any money, because the people trading in the games are constantly buying new.


Some businesses just horribly fail at economics, and ruin the quality of their product in an attempt to control the market. They generally lose sales in the process, spending five dollars to save one. Activision and EA are losing money, and are being too stupid to figure out why.

 

[JPArbiter]

*looks at Fallout NV and how it STILL bugs out on his 360 despite patches*

yup, Obsidian knows a lot about making good games allright.

 

[grigjd3]

Surprising how much making a good product can impact sales.

 

[Draconalis]

Um... "replaying" doesn't mean playing through new content, you know. It means playing through the same content you already played through.

Not saying having lots of content that requires multiple playthrough's is bad(though that certainly is arguable if you don't have the time for it), but it is not replaying or replayability. It's playing through new content.

I didn't play through Half Life 2 7 times because it offered a "new" experience every time. I re-played it because I just love it enough to enjoy it multiple times. And I played Kotor 2 multiple times(as both good and evil) because I LOVE the game and its story and want to experience it over and over.

Basically, re-playing doesn't mean playing through new content. It means playing through content you already played.

Anyway, small rant over. Just something that bugs my balls. And for the record, I agree with him. Of course I do, I'm an Obsidian fanboy.

So, "replay value" refers to what, exactly? Because every time I've ever heard it it's referred to experiencing new content.

Well it should refer to playing the same content over again. Much like how when you re-read a book, you read the same content again. Or watch the same movie again, or listen to the same song again. I realize I'm just arguing semantics, but it just bugs me that people seem to think that "re-playing" means experiencing new content.

Replay value doesn't mean playing the same content, it means playing the same subject. You can play a game 6 times and have a completely different experience every time. That game has high replay value because you don't get bored of it. What's getting "Re-played" is the game, not the content.

The fact that games aren't static products is why I think the term "Replay value" even exists. Books don't have a "Reread value" and movies don't have a "rewatch value", but even if they did, the re-whatever would again be the subject, not the content.

 

[KingofallCosmos]

Don't go jumping the gun there buddy. We all know the rest of the world gets screwed over price wise. That's for 'marry cans only, maybe some Canadins too.

Well it is getting slightly better, they used to just change the $ sign for euro's (in my case) ; so one on one, and then you can convert it from euro's to pounds.

Lately there's some calculation going on; 15$ games tend to be around 11,25 in euros so probably a tenner in UK?

 

[Skeleon]

Yes, thank you!
That's the right way to go about it. That's why I'm still motivated to play Fallout 3 GOTY. That's why I'm still thinking about the various Gothic games and the many ways I could play through them. Replayability.

 

[Comando96]

Well here's a simple concept.

Mods!

Its what PC users do to keep fallout 3 fresh!

I'm new to the Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, getting it only recently.

...my God... the Mods available for it.I was fucking swamped with stuff I could add to make the game better... and stuff I needed to add to "unfuck" the vanilla game. I'm overly familiar with F3 & F:NV modding and as the engine is almost identical I was fine with the mods.

I know for a fact however, modding adds an almost infinite amount of re-playability to the game. If the modding utility was somehow extended over onto consoles then there would be massive reason for people to play and keep playing the games over and over and over again, because through modding they create their ideal game.

 

[Enslave_All_Elves]

Well here's a simple concept.

Mods!

Its what PC users do to keep fallout 3 fresh!

I'm new to the Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, getting it only recently.

...my God... the Mods available for it.I was fucking swamped with stuff I could add to make the game better... and stuff I needed to add to "unfuck" the vanilla game. I'm overly familiar with F3 & F:NV modding and as the engine is almost identical I was fine with the mods.

I know for a fact however, modding adds an almost infinite amount of re-playability to the game. If the modding utility was somehow extended over onto consoles then there would be massive reason for people to play and keep playing the games over and over and over again, because through modding they create their ideal game.

You can mod them. I've never done it but I know a couple people on X Box Live who know mod sites and use some program called Modio (sp?). The idea is you get an external hard drive or flash drive or whatever and you can put the stuff you downloaded on it and use it on X Box. The issue is that people can use the same stuff to hack in multiplayer. Basically dingus console gamers who never played anything online until Halo call cheaters "modders" because they have no fucking idea what a legit mod is. The people I know only mod Oblivion and Fallout, as you suggest, to unfuck stupid things in vanilla or to add content.

I applaud Feargus Arqusomething for having some damn sense in an industry increasingly stuck with the stupid decisions of big publishers.

 

[Comando96]

The issue is that people can use the same stuff to hack in multiplayer.

Hmm... didn't know about that, thought I did keep seing people on the nexus's say "Will there XBox version? No, impossible." but I thought that was just to keep people away who would be asking stupid questions.

There is a more simple answer to this then. Enable a system for more legit modding with a standardized mod process.

Fallout and Elder Scrolls allow you to select what data tools you want to use or add and I am sure there are many more things that could be done to extend mod compatibility over to games by developers...................................... and crucially SONY and MICROSOFT.

If their's is the console that gets the reputation as legit, mod friendly then it will be a massive boost to their consoles popularity.

Also all this compatibility can simply be not included for multilayer games as to exclude hackers and the like.