To be fair to Valve here some games are going with DLC anyway. With or without steam/steamworks. I have Dragon Age and they really push the DLC. By offering a tool thay are just making sure they don't lose sales to developers that intend to offer DLC with their games.
A case for forum members easing up on 2K a bit
- Thread starter thelibra
- Start date
The_Coyote
Emperor
I havn´t said steam invented this wheel. But there is still a major difference between offering a feature and offering and advertising a feature. Advertising has always a kind of embracing (i have the feeling i lack the proper word: it´s meant in sense of to embrace something) in itself. Throu advertising you want your name connected with the advertised feature. And afaik Valve offers DLC, but so far they didn´t demanded a financial fee for it.
Jugalub said:
It´s funny, someone said the value of Valve is higher than the value of EA, and now we shall blame the major studios. It´s really a good self marketing / self positioning if your customers still defend you as if your are a small market player in the market surrounded by evil sharks while you are in truth also one of the bigger players in the game already.
And most funny, most likely now everybody thinks, i think DLC is something evil
DLC isn't a bad thing if done correctly. Expansions for Civ are a form of paid DLC in the sense of being additional content for a core game. Games being released in a episodic form are also quite a good example of good DLC too. Low cost for the first part of the game and a similar cost for subsequent parts.
Bad forms of DLC are, in my opinion, substantial amounts of money for little content relative to the core game. One map or one civilization for $5 would be a good example of bad DLC.
I know you're a complete troll but I still felt compelled to post this.
It´s funny, someone said the value of Valve is higher than the value of EA, and now we shall blame the major studios. It´s really a good self marketing / self positioning if your customers still defend you as if your are a small market player in the market surrounded by evil sharks while you are in truth also one of the bigger players in the game already.
And most funny, most likely now everybody thinks, i think DLC is something evil
Most gaming fans know what is meant by the major labels i.e. labels who release dozens and dozens of games a year like EA. Valve might be a high-value company but their release schedule is still that of a much smaller label... and is it any wonder who does a better job of updating and maintaining their releases for free?
I've got no real stake in bigging up Valve but their resume speaks for itself in Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Team Fortress 2, Counter-strike, Portal, Day of Defeat and Left 4 Dead 1 & 2.
The_Coyote
Emperor
You know market power and number of released games aren´t the same for Valve. One of the firms with a real high market power considering games is afaik Wal-mart. And they developed quite few games so far? (i don´t know, but i think the number is quite low) The bigger part of Valves value should be now made throu steam and no longer throu the game developing departement.
Did you mean "alluring" which tempts someone to embrace something?(just a guess as I didn't really understand what you were saying) When you say advertising, do you mean Valve advertising this feature to developers? Or are you referring to the use of advertising to lure the player to available DLC?
Advertising the feature to a developer to get him to use the service, to me, is no different than any other product expousing its features. Even toilet paper tells you what ply and how much paper are contained in the package.
The in-game advertising is a different story all together. In the DA game I mentioned, in my other post, There was an added in game merchant. He was standing there with an icon over his head. The icon stayed until he was dealt with. That did not do much for the immersion of the game. Worse it is a game that depends on that immersion. What I mean is, for me anyway, that game only works as long as I can imagine (or feel) like I'm a part of that world. That merchant and his icon took me out of that state. That one in-game ad might only have been included because the DLC was made before release. It might have been included as a test to see if it would be accepted or not and the negative comments in their "social network" stopped more. Worse the negativaty of that ad was put there to make, what they really want, the acceptance of DLC palatable.
The_Coyote
Emperor
No, alluring goes definitely to far. It could be something in the sense of "to adopt sth. as one's own".
(or in sense of Valve "embraces" microtransactions)My point is, Valve presented microtransactions as individual item - more or less quite highlighted, not as part of a list of steamworks features. And most likely only feature you want to be well known, you want your brand to be identified with are highlighted (of course considering the receiver of the ad).
Some other facts are excluded (or do you know how many liters of water was consumed to produce your toilett paper) or noted in small figures or as part of a list. Microtransaction have the same level of presentation like the point "UNREAL AND STEAMWORKS".
There is nothing bad about this in general, but displaying it in such a highlighted way could be an indication that microtransactions are a wanted feature. And of course, Valve also get it´s part from every sold DLC on steam. (so they even earn money with DLCs, even if they don´t produce sold DLCs on their own). In short: It´s not that this information is given, it´s how and where this information is given.
Considering, DA, yes i know this unfriendly ads (it´s more than one). Adding this guys only after you bought the DLC would be the much more customer friendly way. But i would say that it was a way to test how ready the market already is. Hopeful EA / Bioware didn´t identified this as gain for their sell figures.
Sorry, you did mention it but in your next post, one that was posted just before I did so I didn't see it.
Are the people who build Steam the same people who build those games?
The reason Valve don't sell DLC themselves is that they already have the money rolling in from the sales of other games and DLC (I've heard figures of 30% take from Steam sales), and in their position it must have been worked out they benefit more by making themselves look the good guys by giving away free stuff.
Other publishers aren't trying to maintain an adware product as popular as Steam so they have less to lose from the negative publicity of selling poor-value DLC (as opposed to good value DLC
)Hardly, they have the reputation they do as every game is off a high quality and they're still patched and updated even years later. It's no wonder that when you do that, games such as Team Fortress 2 continue to sell well years later. Why do MMOs sell well for years? Because their constantly updated. Why do games in annual iterations not sell well long term? Because they are out of date within a year. This stuff isn't hard. Valve aren't funding their updating of games through the profitability of all titles on Steam. It's profitable for them just to keep their games up-to-date so they'll continually be bought in droves.
You say it like Valve are conning people into believing they are a top developer? They've earnt that rep through high quality title after high quality title, with long term support.
bjbrains
Man of U-235
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 837
The long term support of their products is pretty ridiculous(ly awesome). TF2 has gotten major content updates every few months since launch, and bug fixes on a regular basis (all for free). They've done the same for left 4 dead (Adding several new games modes and a new minicampaign to L4D 1), and regular bugfixes to their other games. When it comes to long term support of their products, they've got a good record of going beyond any other 'mainstream' company when it comes to support. BTW, the TF2 updates were developed/launched before Steam had its big rise (It took several months after the release of the orange box for it to catch on with developers/publishers.)
Valve could be the best developer on the planet but it's beside the point. Being the best developer doesn't make you the best seller of other companys' video games.
I appreciate that their games have been very well received by fans and gamers alike - I own TF2 myself - but it doesn't put them above any criticism. They clearly are in a position where their image to gamers makes a big difference on their primary source of revenue (sales of games on Steam). It's just a very effective combination that they are a developer of games themselves. Surely you would agree it would potentially hurt their image if they started charging for DLC on their games.
I don't wish to argue they're conning people into believing they are the top developer. What I'm saying is they're in a position where keeping positive PR is a high priority because they take a generous cut from selling other peoples' games and their respective DLC.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Valve are just exceptionally clever in this area. I don't tend to praise companies or businesses that are exceptionally clever but rather the ones that offer me a good quality product for a good price. Valve as a game developer I would praise. Valve as a Steam-producer I am more inclined to be cynical about, as Steam is adware in my eyes and has little real value to me.
Valve is great at spinning up positive PR for themselves. That's what they're best at.
That said, I do seperate publisher from developer. Stardock the publisher > Stardock the developer for example (great publisher, good developer)
That said, I do seperate publisher from developer. Stardock the publisher > Stardock the developer for example (great publisher, good developer)
I don't know which thread to put this in, so I'll put it here.
I rebought Civ4 through Steam because I prefer it. I find the digital copy to be more reliable to install and easier to patch. Plus, I can keep track of my game installations rapidly through the interface.
Furthermore, I have a ton of friends who talk with me and organize games through the community system.
The point? When I saw that Civ V was a Steamworks game, I was happier than I would've been with a standalone game. I know this is a strange thing to imagine for some, but Steam is like the "console" of the PC universe, and seeing major titles integrated really does make for a better product for some of us.
On the SomethingAwful Games forum, which I mod, the view of Civ V on Steam has been overwhelmingly positive; this is probably because most of our readers were early Steam adopters.
So don't forget that there aren't just people out there who dislike Steam. There is another hardcore contingent that is glad to see it.
I rebought Civ4 through Steam because I prefer it. I find the digital copy to be more reliable to install and easier to patch. Plus, I can keep track of my game installations rapidly through the interface.
Furthermore, I have a ton of friends who talk with me and organize games through the community system.
The point? When I saw that Civ V was a Steamworks game, I was happier than I would've been with a standalone game. I know this is a strange thing to imagine for some, but Steam is like the "console" of the PC universe, and seeing major titles integrated really does make for a better product for some of us.
On the SomethingAwful Games forum, which I mod, the view of Civ V on Steam has been overwhelmingly positive; this is probably because most of our readers were early Steam adopters.
So don't forget that there aren't just people out there who dislike Steam. There is another hardcore contingent that is glad to see it.
Then you're completely unfamiliar with what adware actually is. Next you'll be telling me that Civ V is adware as it will present the logos of the game developer and publisher during the opening sequence. Just because Steam has little value for you it doesn't mean that there isn't (quite literally) millions around the world using it with the games that employ Steamworks. No doubt the storefront is intended to help sell games but that doesn't make it adware.
Yeh, I'm exactly the same. I wish all my future PC games used Steamworks so they were integrated with Steam. It's a shame I can't register my old games with Steam that are available to purchase on Steam but that's not anybody's fault.
And I say this as someone who hated Steam when it was first released as it was dreadful - even up until the point of where Half Life 2 was the first game to be tied to Steam.
Just because people are using a game that uses Steamworks, doesn't mean they approve of Steamworks. Many don't care, some disapprove but buy it anyways.
I really can't stand people who want to see PC gaming monopolized by Valve, or anyone else.
Mods may not like me saying this, but I really think they're acting like idiots who can't think ahead for more then 10 minutes.
Games should not be tied into a retail store like that. Stardock's version of Steamworks that is coming out will not tie into Impulse (but there is a requirement that the game be sold non-exclusively on Impulse, which is fine) Elemental will be one of the first games to use it. I know one of 1C's games on Impulse is actually the guinea pig.
I really can't stand people who want to see PC gaming monopolized by Valve, or anyone else.
Mods may not like me saying this, but I really think they're acting like idiots who can't think ahead for more then 10 minutes.
Games should not be tied into a retail store like that. Stardock's version of Steamworks that is coming out will not tie into Impulse (but there is a requirement that the game be sold non-exclusively on Impulse, which is fine) Elemental will be one of the first games to use it. I know one of 1C's games on Impulse is actually the guinea pig.
pleasenoname
Chieftain
Monopolies initially offer very low prices in an attempt to drive everyone else out of business, then when the competition has been driven out of business, the monopoly raises the price. Everyone suffers then and there is no recourse because there is no more competitors left to buy from.
Valve has no monopoly here. They have, however, made a feature rich DRM system that a lot of people prefer to the alternatives (Games for Windows Live, anyone?), and adding Steamworks adds value for many of the people who constantly use Steam.
Don't be hyperbolic. Are you a paranoid penny-pincher? Of course not. Similarly, supporters of an integrated system aren't idiots or zombies.
pleasenoname
Chieftain
If everyone does as you suggest, they will.
These are marketing terms. They mean nothing to me. Do you have any affiliation with any company related to Civilization 5, in any way?
pleasenoname
Chieftain
Woah, what? Better than most?
