RE: Change publishers (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds Series



Message


Gareth_Bryne -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 6:38:02 AM)

This is so funny, it isn't funny anymore. Kayoz defending the status quo, and somebody wanting something that usually boils down to two things:

More marketing
Lesser price

And then the discussion boils down to two other things:

Elliot has a right to his actions (Kayoz is right)
The community has a right to discuss Elliot's actions and inactions (The other person is right)

In my opinion, while I was also dissatisfied with the lack of marketing, the situation was mitigated somewhat, in part by Matrix, in part by the community itself (a very important point). As for the price, don't get me wrong - Distant Worlds is very high priced, but the price has been optimized over time, and more to the point, the gameplay is unique. ES may offer multiplayer and several interesting concepts, but the rest of the competition doesn't even come close. So Distant Worlds is in fact a monopolist, a monopolist due to quality above all. So spread the word about it and hope that one day, preferably before DW2 [:)], the situation will change. And while you're at it, agree to disagree here and bombard Matrix's office email with your marketing optimization plans [:D]!




Kayoz -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 10:28:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
...do not any way imply that just because there is trust, the same business relationship must be blindly retained


Where did I suggest that? It's Elliot and Erik's business. Not mine. If either of them felt the relationship required re-evaluation then it would be in their interest - nay their duty (Elliot to his (assumed) family and Erik to his corporation) - to revisit the terms of the contract. Their choice. Their responsibility. Their business. Not yours or mine.

There is no identifiable wrongdoing on either side (or not that anyone has presented). So it's inappropriate for anyone to suggest that one side is getting the short end of the deal and should find a way to wriggle out of or otherwise terminate the arrangement. It is, as I see it, actually immoral. That sort of suggestion is encouraging actions which can easily be harmful to the other side (edit/correction: either side may be harmed). And here's the tricky bit you seem to miss again and again - harm to a party that has done no wrong and quite possibly a great deal of good. You might be comfortable with such a harmful action being provoked by your catcalls - but I am not.

I did not suggest that Elliot consider himself morally bound to Matrix. I merely take the stance that to suggest potentially harmful actions; to goad someone into taking actions that may harm another without any evidence of the harm being defensive (ie: in response to harm received) - is unjustified and amoral. Perhaps if I spell it out in explicit and easy to understand words, you'll finally get it.

And for someone claiming experience in contract management, it's passing strange that you repeatedly miss my core argument.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
And unfortunately it seems this is being allowed by the Moderators.


I merely pointed out that some might consider the inability to consider emotional issues outside the context of profit/loss (or in this case a binding contract) - might be considered sociopathic behaviour. Perhaps you don't like it - but that is a (some would say "the") defining characteristic of sociopaths. If you don't like people to draw conclusions from your inability to acknowledge "loyalty" and "trust" outside of a contractual relationship - then perhaps you shouldn't make statements which are disturbingly sociopathic in nature.

"The only way your comments on trust and loyalty make any sense is if you think there is a long-term agreement.". Loyalty and trust just don't makes sense to you outside of a contract. Your words, not mine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
Your 4-8 month old post response was expected.


So why did you bother bringing it up? You knew I'd dismiss it and consider it irrelevant, yet you wasted the space on the forums with a knowingly pointless quote?

At some point I re-examined my position and determined that I shouldn't criticize Matrix without clear evidence that they're bollocksing it up. I can't imagine it's any fun for Erik to be constantly second-guessed by a community that lacks the facts that led him to his decisions.

But why and when did I switch my stance? What triggered it? I don't know. I don't particularly care. Perhaps it's important enough to you to waste the mental energy on. But not me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
However, this doesn’t mean that I have to agree that this is the right path for the reasons I’ve already outlined


How can we possibly agree on a path when I pretty much cross my arms, shake my head and say - ad nauseum - "None of my business"? If there's a path to be taken, it's for Elliot and Erik (et al) to decide. Not me. Since I've been repeatedly and abundantly clear that it is none of my business and any such path decision is entirely in the hands of them to make... then how, with your claimed experience in contract management, we possibly agree?

And in closing, here's the bit which characterizes our entire debate:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
...you consider Matrix performance good enough to justify an ongoing arrangement...


What?!? I repeated it like a mantra - in bold mind you - over and over again and you STILL don't get it? I/we don't know. It's none of my/our business. How many times do I need to repeat it before you can finally understand this concept? Why do you insist on attributing a stance to me, (good enough) on an issue that I pointedly refuse to take a position on (Matrix-CodeForce relationship)? How many times to I have to repeat myself?

In my one bit of wild speculation - conveniently tagged as such and explicitly identified as essentially a bit of worthless guesswork which I won't put any importance on - I closed with the words "none of my business".

None of my/your business. Is this really so hard for you to understand? Are you so ignorant that you can't understand it, or are you trying to start a flame war by going full retard on me? If it's the latter, then just come out and say it.

Erik has stated - clearly and repeatedly - that it is in his interest and has every intention of making DW as successful as he can. Constantly second-guessing his actions, with speculations based on complete ignorance, is disrespectful and rude. If you can't understand that, then I don't know what else to say on the matter.




Kayoz -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 11:08:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gareth_Bryne
Kayoz defending the status quo


No, I'm not.

It's none of my business. I'm neither defending nor attacking the status quo (that being Matrix and CodeForce's business relationship). Maintaining or changing their relationship is entirely their decision. I take neither a pro or anti status-quo stance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gareth_Bryne
The community has a right to discuss Elliot's actions and inactions (The other person is right)


On issues like bugs, design decisions and game balance - then absolutely, yes. If I've been lax in my criticism of Elliot's decision to use C# and his only touching on multi-threading as an afterthought, I do apologize. I felt I'd raked him over the coals quite enough.

But where his business decisions are concerned, I'm less willing to criticize or comment than some.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gareth_Bryne
Distant Worlds is in fact a monopolist, a monopolist due to quality above all.


More apathy, I think. Most game publishers won't touch a game unless it's a copy of something that's already successful and on the market. They seem to recoil in horror from any suggestion of innovation or creativity. Got a proposal for yet another 1st person shooter based on [fill in the blank] War? Bob's your uncle and they're shoving a contract across the table before the ink has dried. Something new and innovative? Make sure to give the secretary your visitor's pass when you leave. Oh, and take your proposal with you - our recycling bin is full.

If Matrix has a monopoly - then it's only because mainstream publishers (EA, Activision, etc) treat innovation like religious institutions do heresy. I can't imagine Elliot was greeted with open arms and enthusiasm when he brought an incomplete DW (ie: in need of funding) to other publishers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gareth_Bryne
agree to disagree here and bombard Matrix's office email with your marketing optimization plans [:D]!


No problems with that. I seem to remember Erik actively soliciting suggestions for sites, bloggers and the such that he might approach to market DW. He's been consistently open to and appreciative of constructive criticism. I'd guess he'd welcome a flood of suggestions to his inbox.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:17:25 PM)

Once again I'll refrain from using the sort of inappropriate language you are choosing in your responses but I will continue to call you out accordingly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
.. should find a way to wriggle out of or otherwise terminate the arrangement. It is, as I see it, actually immoral.


Again you are fabricating something I did not say and then using your own fabrication to inappropriately claim immorality.

As I have said before, I'm not suggesting wriggling out or termination. That's just ridiculous! Under these circumstances I would indeed agree with you.

As I have said before, I'm suggesting that options are considered at the end of an contract, and that the evaluation considers many factors including the past relationship i.e. including trust.

Apology accepted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
I merely take the stance that to suggest potentially harmful actions; to goad someone into taking actions that may harm another without any evidence of the harm being defensive (ie: in response to harm received) - is unjustified and amoral. Perhaps if I spell it out in explicit and easy to understand words, you'll finally get it.


As I have said before, I am suggesting consideration of options at the end of a contract period. It may or may not be the case that Matrix remains the correct choice.

My suggestion to consider options is justified because I consider Matrix Marketing performance poor. If you do not agree because you have changed your mind for no reason all I can do is laugh at the depth of your logic and the irony in your Christopher Hitchens quote.

As I have said before, the evaluation of options should be happening at a mutually agreed time and should be using a fair evaluation methodology that considers all factors including the past relationship. I have been involved in this dozens of times, on both sides of the fence, and not once has there has a suggestion of amoral behaviour when there is a change. Only you Kayoz. This is your misunderstanding. You seem to think this is amoral when it is not.

Indeed it can be done with significant grace. One of many examples come to mind. For a world first new technology, I was essentially the Publisher, and actually encouraged and helped the other party to consider other options after the original agreement expired. We had received far more than expected from the original agreement and their future products were clearly growing beyond our Core Business. Even now we both stay in touch from time to time to explore ideas where we might work together again someday. This is highly relevant, as the Matrix focus is War Strategy, and as you have previously agreed (unless you have changed your mind without evidence again) they do not adapt their Marketing Strategy. Why can't this also be done with grace if Matrix have no interest in adapting?

Once again you have jumped to conclusions, demonstrated your lack of competence, resorted to inappropriate behaviour in describing me as amoral and with your "spell it out" material.

By the way, how can you claim Marketing is "Reasonable" "without clear evidence"? By your own logic, shouldn't you be neutral Kayoz?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
I merely pointed out that some might consider the inability to consider emotional issues outside the context of profit/loss (or in this case a binding contract) - might be considered sociopathic behaviour. Perhaps you don't like it - but that is a (some would say "the") defining characteristic of sociopaths. If you don't like people to draw conclusions from your inability to acknowledge "loyalty" and "trust" outside of a contractual relationship - then perhaps you shouldn't make statements which are disturbingly sociopathic in nature.

"The only way your comments on trust and loyalty make any sense is if you think there is a long-term agreement.". Loyalty and trust just don't makes sense to you outside of a contract. Your words, not mine.


Again you are fabricating something I did not say and then using your own fabrication to inappropriately claim sociopathic behaviour.

As I have said before, outside of a contract, trust and loyalty are one of many factors that need to be considered.

Many factors Kayoz. Loyalty and trust are just one of them. Your own failures to listen to what I am repeatedly saying defeats your entire argument.

And as you already know, but failed to mention, what I was doing was trying to make sense of your accusation i.e. trying to put myself in your shoes in writing it, which requires exploration across boundaries. And I have already highlighted how wrong that accusation is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
What?!? I repeated it like a mantra - in bold mind you - over and over again and you STILL don't get it? I/we don't know. It's none of my/our business. How many times do I need to repeat it before you can finally understand this concept? Why do you insist on attributing a stance to me, (good enough) on an issue that I pointedly refuse to take a position on (Matrix-CodeForce relationship)? How many times to I have to repeat myself?


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
I'm neither defending nor attacking the status quo (that being Matrix and CodeForce's business relationship). Maintaining or changing their relationship is entirely their decision. I take neither a pro or anti status-quo stance.


Given the strength of your words here, let's go and check what you actually wrote shall we Kayoz?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
Furthermore, perhaps I'm reading too much into the Matrix-CodeForce relationship, but it seems to be one that works.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kayoz
It's a combination that works and rewards both participants.


That's not a completely contradictory untagged speculation is it Kayoz?

Let me guess. 2 days or so have passed and you changed your mind ... Speculation is now okay and now you are neutral when previously you expressed a position.

If I was Kayoz ... what words do you think I would be using?

In case anybody is wondering, yes, I have the popcorn. Plenty more in the pantry.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:23:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gareth_Bryne
Elliot has a right to his actions (Kayoz is right)

Err ... no kidding. I think we might all be right on that one!




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:26:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DevildogFF

I've always like you, Ice....

Now I understand better *why* I like you.

:)

Cheers DevildogFF.

It's good practice to avoid rising to the bait and responding the way Kayoz does ... plenty of difficult people around.






Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:30:22 PM)

And here is some popcorn for you as well Kayoz

[sm=00000613.gif]




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:37:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76
I think Matrix own the IP so no DW from anybody else.Elloit could still make another 4x game but not with DW in the title.

Good one.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:40:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
...

Welcome to the forum Gregorovitch55.

Not all of us are as friendly as Kayoz.

[;)]






Rising-Sun -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:45:35 PM)

Take it easy ol' timers, we dont want another tread hi-jacked again.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 1:50:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RisingSun
Take it easy ol' timers, we dont want another tread hi-jacked again.


Popcorn?

[sm=00000613.gif]




Rising-Sun -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 5:28:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania

quote:

ORIGINAL: RisingSun
Take it easy ol' timers, we dont want another tread hi-jacked again.


Popcorn?

[sm=00000613.gif]


Sure as long you add some butter :)




Spidey -> RE: Change publishers (2/19/2014 5:56:54 PM)

I'm off for a few days and this happens when I get back? [:(]

Well, after having read the development in this topic, there are a few points I feel like making.

1. On the extension of contracts
It's quite normal that once a business contract expires, you consider your options. It's what Elliot should (and almost certainly will) do and it's what Matrix is no doubt going to do. The entire talk has been on whether Elliot should stick with Matrix, but do we know that Matrix even wants to stick with him? Of course they should spend a little while considering what to do next and how they wish to arrange it.

If they feel like continuing for a second spell then that's what they should do. If one of them don't then that's probably fine too. They'll shake hands, appreciate the good times they've had and the money they've made, and then they'll move on, with almost no hurt feelings between them, because both parties know that it's nothing personal, just business. Or at least that's the theory. In practice, most business managers are a bit less Vulcan than that, but since I don't know any specifics, I really don't care to speculate on the exact details of the relationship between Elliot and Erik.

That being said, it really wouldn't surprise me if Elliot would have a hard time getting better deals anywhere since he's a micro-developer. I don't think Valve is likely to throw in much support and I don't see how Matrix can justify support if he's going to undermine them by putting his game on Steam.

2. On emotion in business decisions
Business managers definitively do not qualify as sociopaths just because they make their business decisions based on logic. Similarly, it has nothing whatsoever to do with sociopathy, and in fact isn't even the tiniest little indication of the condition, if one suggests that business managers should in fact base their decisions on logic. Finally, it is very much not an indication of sociopathy that one doesn't see the sense in comments about loyalty, trust, and various friendship fluff-terms in a discussion about a business contract.

Just thought I'd make that clear. By the way, accusing people of having empathy-issues or otherwise insulting them for no reason is in fact a slight indication of sociopathy.

3. On the evaluation of marketing
There are in fact more ways to evaluate an effort than through sheer numbers. The qualitative approach would be to simply do key segment or focus group studies or, if we're doing it entirely bare-bones, do a one-person effect analysis. Show the created material to one person and ask said person how he interprets it and whether it makes him want to spend potentially a hundred bucks on the game? Elliot can do this on his own, using himself as a test subject, and then he'll have the first vague answer as to whether he is satisfied with the marketing efforts, won't he? Similarly, we can do this same thing, with the caveat that we only have access to bits and parts of the total effort. Still, this can in fact give us a decent enough first idea of whether we think the marketing was good or not.

4. On the importance of minding one's own business
It really doesn't matter if something is our business or not. This is a forum. we discuss things on a forum. Even things that aren't actually our business. For instance, it really wasn't my business that Clinton got a blowjob from Lewinsky or that he then lied about it under oath. It was totally his choice to unzip and her choice to smoke the cigar, and I do believe they were both adult at the time. Does that mean I shouldn't have an opinion on whether it was a good or a bad choice that a president decides to get a blowjob from an intern? Of course not.

5. On lies and mistakes
A lie is an intentional untruthfulness. A mistake is a claim that turns out to be wrong. When you call something a lie, you're also implying intent. Not just that something in fact is wrong but that the one who said it knew it to be wrong and said it anyway. That's rude and not called for in most civilized conversations. As a rule of thumb, if your mother said it, would you call her a liar or would you simply correct her? That's how you should behave in a civilized conversation.

6. On wild speculation based on Elliot's inactivity in a marketing capacity
I can't speak for others, but personally I find it to be a real drag to occupy myself with all kinds of social media crap. And I'm not even the lone guy who dedicates my life to writing my very own super-complex 4x game. It would not surprise me in the slightest if Elliot isn't energized or motivated by speculating about promotion and marketing. He's busy doing his game and I doubt he has much energy left for media bullshit when he's not working on the game.

Taking time off from working on the game, by the way, would also result in him not getting the things done that he'd like to get done. He's one guy, isn't he? He can spend an afternoon working on his website or he can try to make the AI that little bit better. He can spend hours doing a developer blog, writing about what he is doing and what he'd like to get done, or he can spend those hours actually getting it done.

My speculation is that he's likely spending his time as a developer, thinking like a developer, avoiding unnecessary distractions, and consequently leaving all the marketing crap to his publisher, much like a writer would spend his time writing books and leave all the publicity work to his publisher. And that's totally like it should be. I'd be very surprised if the contract doesn't make Matrix responsible for the marketing, so why should he allow himself to get distracted by it?

7. Conclusion (no, it isn't really)
I freaking hate Steam, it sucks, it blows, it's stinking crapware that makes me feel as if someone's spying on me, and I WILL NOT USE IT!! Also, I fail to see any why Matrix couldn't offer an internship to a marketing grad student and have that free labour slave his ass off to produce marketing material and spam the living hell out of various strat game fora around the web with stories about how great this game is. And the crazy thing is that the grad student would probably love the job, since it's a real world non-theoretical application of his £€€7 marketing skillz.




solops -> Keep publisher (2/19/2014 5:57:34 PM)

Keep Matrix. I like Matrix's sales model. I will always buy from them preferentially, given a choice. I have a Steam account and many Steam games. I detest Steam. I detest its intrusive and controlling nature. Hooray for Matrix! Long live their marketing model and I WILL pay extra for it if I need to. Many great things in our niche would never see the light of day without Matrix.




jesuswhywhy -> RE: Keep publisher (2/19/2014 9:35:39 PM)

+1 lock this thread its just too nuts to go on




Icemania -> RE: Keep publisher (2/20/2014 11:30:09 AM)

There is only one person here who has repeatedly claimed others are lying, amoral, immoral sociopaths.

In contrast, I've managed to respond without using such language despite extreme provocation. I have a right to defend myself from such accusations.

And let's not forget welcoming a new forum member with an accusation of schizophrenia.

The rest of this thread is quite within normal parameters.

The appropriate action speaks for itself and it does not involve locking this thread.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/20/2014 11:46:22 AM)

Nice post Spidey

[sm=Cool-049.gif]




Tcby -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 12:06:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania

Nice post Spidey

[sm=Cool-049.gif]


+1 to this [:)]




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 11:00:11 AM)

As many of you might be aware Horizon has recently been launched, and as always, Space Sector has a quality review.

What I find interesting is that IGN and GameSpot have reviews while Polygon has news and PC Gamer has a preview.

In contrast, I cannot find anything material regarding Distant Worlds (beyond basic information and user reviews), particularly for Shadows or Universe on gaming sites such as these, that provide exposure to the 4X gaming audience.

For those that consider Distant Worlds marketing to be reasonable or good ... on what basis do you make this assertion?

Note: I am not making any comments about the quality of these sites, this is not my point.




Icemania -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 11:07:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey
6. On wild speculation based on Elliot's inactivity in a marketing capacity
I can't speak for others, but personally I find it to be a real drag to occupy myself with all kinds of social media crap. And I'm not even the lone guy who dedicates my life to writing my very own super-complex 4x game. It would not surprise me in the slightest if Elliot isn't energized or motivated by speculating about promotion and marketing. He's busy doing his game and I doubt he has much energy left for media bullshit when he's not working on the game.

Taking time off from working on the game, by the way, would also result in him not getting the things done that he'd like to get done. He's one guy, isn't he? He can spend an afternoon working on his website or he can try to make the AI that little bit better. He can spend hours doing a developer blog, writing about what he is doing and what he'd like to get done, or he can spend those hours actually getting it done.

My speculation is that he's likely spending his time as a developer, thinking like a developer, avoiding unnecessary distractions, and consequently leaving all the marketing crap to his publisher, much like a writer would spend his time writing books and leave all the publicity work to his publisher. And that's totally like it should be. I'd be very surprised if the contract doesn't make Matrix responsible for the marketing, so why should he allow himself to get distracted by it?

You may well be right Spidey. But even if this is right the developer needs to be be mindful of the importance of Marketing e.g. to help provide future capacity for Distant Worlds 2 and so on. We all have activities in the workplace we don't particularly enjoy, but they need to be done. And indeed this can be done with a fraction of the developers time e.g. occasional checks and discussions on Matrix performance.





ASHBERY76 -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 11:35:19 AM)

The player base does 99% of the marketing.The expansion is supposedly close and all we know is a small article on spacesector.That just about says it all.




Osito -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 11:43:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania

As many of you might be aware Horizon has recently been launched, and as always, Space Sector has a quality review.

What I find interesting is that IGN and GameSpot have reviews while Polygon has news and PC Gamer has a preview.

In contrast, I cannot find anything material regarding Distant Worlds (beyond basic information and user reviews), particularly for Shadows or Universe on gaming sites such as these, that provide exposure to the 4X gaming audience.

For those that consider Distant Worlds marketing to be reasonable or good ... on what basis do you make this assertion?

Note: I am not making any comments about the quality of these sites, this is not my point.



I know very little about marketing, so I'm fairly neutral about whether or not DW marketing has been reasonable or good. I didn't find out about the game until mid 2012, but I have to say that I wasn't really looking until mid 2012. So I think someone who is interested in this sort of game will most likely find it, because they'll be looking at the kind of sites (in particular Space Sector) which would cover it.

People who are not actively looking for this type of game will probably not find it. Is that a good or a bad thing? I think there's certainly a risk that the more casual kind of player would be put off by DW, and that would be quite damaging to the franchise, as they'd probably be quite vocal about their opinion (particularly on Steam forums, if the game had been released on Steam).

Although I wasn't around for the launch of DW in 2010, I'm pretty sure that if it had received wider exposure at the time it would have received very damaging publicity. Why do I say this? Largely on the basis that in February 2011 Space Sector gave DW a review score of 5.0. If Space Sector could only give 5.0, what would the likes of IGN and Gamespot have said? There would no doubt have been a lot of negative feedback on widely read forums. You might make a quick buck from increased sales at release, but that kind of publicity can kill a franchise, because it can discourage those who would like the game if they tried it.

Obviously, the game is much better now, and maybe it's now got to the point where it can withstand much better exposure. Perhaps, with the release of Universe, it will now get better exposure. We've yet to see how Matrix will handle this release. For all we know, it may even appear on Steam. Then we can have some really good forum arguments: the Steambois will have a field day ;-)

Osito




Gregorovitch55 -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 1:21:17 PM)

quote:

7. Conclusion (no, it isn't really)
I freaking hate Steam, it sucks, it blows, it's stinking crapware that makes me feel as if someone's spying on me, and I WILL NOT USE IT!! Also, I fail to see any why Matrix couldn't offer an internship to a marketing grad student and have that free labour slave his ass off to produce marketing material and spam the living hell out of various strat game fora around the web with stories about how great this game is. And the crazy thing is that the grad student would probably love the job, since it's a real world non-theoretical application of his £€€7 marketing skillz.


I used to hold exactly the same opinion about Steam and refused point blank to buy a game that I couldn't fire up direct from it's .exe. I was eventually broken by Civ5 and Skyrim. Now I still have have two major reservations about Steam, namely always on DRM and Steam's drift towards a monopoly position in the PC gaming market (GoG notwithstanding) but I have changed my view somewhat having experienced it for 18 months or so. Main reasons are:

1. Steam has almost singlehandedly stopped and reversed the decline in importance of my beloved PC platform (with honourable mention to Skyrim/FONV modders, GoG and the Youtubers) making it much harder for publishers to justify dropping it. Matrix itself can only benefit from this.

2. Steam does an immense amount to promote new dev talent and bring games to market that otherwise never see the light of day. A classic example has just come out: Banished. The Steam sales and the player charts can and do enable successive waves of interest games that get more bucks were they need to be - in the devs bank accounts. It has demonstrably transformed the status of one of my favourite devs/publishers Paradox and the initial release quality of EU4 is a testament to the effect IMO.

3. It is in my view an excellent gaming service in every respect (except the DRM bit). I know a lot of people don't like their games automatically patched (although you can turn that off) but I do and most importantly it pretty much forces devs to make sure patches are compatible with players existing save files which was not always the case. I do not miss the hassle of installing my old games from DVD and going through the process of looking up endless details of which patches need installing in what order.

4. Although my view is that if I buy a game, book, film, whatever I have an absolute right to do what I want with it other than copy it or use the material for my own financial gain whatever the EULA says (becasue it can't override my consumer rights) I choose not to press this issue with Steam. The reason is that I can buy 2nd and 3rd choice titles at huge discounts in Steam sales rather than scratch around 2nd hand markets and this means a) a lot more money gets into the devs hands and b) the Steam sales themselves expose games to significantly larger audiences than they otherwise would get. See TB's vid for fuller explanation on 2nd hand games market.

You could say I'm simply justifying my own decision to finally crack and sign up for a Steam account - you could be right - but i think the balance of evidence is that Steam is good for the PC platform, good for indie dev talent and good for me as a player.

[Edit] One other thing: Steam also collects and collates a goldmine of data about what people are playing, when and on what kit. One might view this as something akin to the NSA and PRISM, but I believe it is of enormous help to devs in designing games people want to play and can play and focusing their resources more accurately.





Gregorovitch55 -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 1:34:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
...

Welcome to the forum Gregorovitch55.

Not all of us are as friendly as Kayoz.

[;)]




Cheers mate. I confess I could not be bothered to engage with someone who either misreads or fails to read what you have actually said and then accuses you of schizophrenia for quoting their own paraphrase of what they thought you had said. Pointless.




Flinkebeinchen -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 4:28:17 PM)

I took a week long break from the forums after getting annoyed by Kayoz snipping quotes of my posts, good to see the discussion goes on. Icemania you are my hero [sm=00000436.gif]





Cauldyth -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 8:25:06 PM)

Yeah, maybe the community here would be larger and more active if innocent attempts to participate weren't being met with unwarranted attacks.




Kayoz -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 9:19:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
That's not a completely contradictory untagged speculation is it Kayoz?


I make no assumptions or speculations that are not part of any common law system. What does the court assume when you step before a judge/jury? That you're innocent. What does the law say about acts which it does not cover? Nulla poena sine lege. Nothing.

If my assumptions (that without a complaint from Elliot or Erik or evidence of wrongdoing/unreasonable conduct, there is no basis to question their arrangement) are incorrect, then so is the fundamental basis of civil society. Perhaps it's a fundamental difference in our outlooks of justice. From what I can gather from your statements, Icey, you come from North Korea or some such place. How's your beloved leader these days?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
By the way, how can you claim Marketing is "Reasonable" "without clear evidence"? By your own logic, shouldn't you be neutral Kayoz?


The burden of proof that it is not reasonable is on you. Not on me. Don't try to shirk your duties. This is a fundamental concept in western civil society. Perhaps you come from a country where one has to prove one's innocence - but that's not where Matrix is based, nor CodeForce.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Icemania
Many factors Kayoz. Loyalty and trust are just one of them. Your own failures to listen to what I am repeatedly saying defeats your entire argument.


Failure to listen? As opposed to your repeated ignoring of "none of your business"? Pot kettle black at the very best for you, Snowy.

As for the sociopathy issue you allude to - it's your words, not mine. You can't understand loyalty or trust outside of a contractual relationship. Your words. Not mine.

Really, it's getting rather tedious to go round and round with a crazy person who is (willfully or otherwise) ignorant of the basic concept of who has to provide the burden of proof.

Your burden, IM. Meet the burden and we can go forwards. Otherwise, conversation with you makes as much progress as a hamster in a wheel.




Kayoz -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 9:35:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
1. Steam has almost singlehandedly stopped and reversed the decline in importance of my beloved PC platform


[image]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aahALKo3ctE/T24-J-ENExI/AAAAAAAAAEA/FHsZwYUszl8/s1600/imgres.jpeg[/image]
Completely baseless and absurd claim. Twaddle. Hogwash. Use whatever adjective you choose for "worthless".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
2. Steam does an immense amount to promote new dev talent and bring games to market that otherwise never see the light of day. A classic example has just come out: Banished.


As well as many which should never see the light of day. If you want to assign credit for the beneficial effects of Steam - then you must also accept the entries on the opposite side of the balance sheet.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
3. It is in my view an excellent gaming service in every respect (except the DRM bit).


Your personal opinion. Nothing more.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
4. Although my view is that if I buy a game, book, film...whatever the EULA says (becasue it can't override my consumer rights) I choose not to press this issue with Steam.


No, you've bent over and spread your cheeks for Steam. You agree to and condone their abuse of your consumer rights each and every time you give them money.

If you want to see the continued erosion of your consumer rights, then by all means continue giving your cash to Steam.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gregorovitch55
... rather than scratch around 2nd hand markets and this means a) a lot more money gets into the devs hands and b) the Steam sales themselves expose games to significantly larger audiences


You miss the obvious:
c) More revenue for Steam.

That's all Steam cares about. It's a company. Making money is it's objective. It's whole reason for existence.




Kayoz -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 9:46:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey
4. On the importance of minding one's own business
It really doesn't matter if something is our business or not. This is a forum. we discuss things on a forum. Even things that aren't actually our business.


Some things are considered inappropriate or off-limits for discussion. Just as I don't think it's appropriate to engage in vitriolic political rants here, I also don't think it's appropriate to question Matrix's private business affairs without any documentation to support one's position. Got a complaint and some facts to back it up - then fine, bring it on. Thus far, nobody has presented anything worthwhile.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spidey
5. On lies and mistakes
A lie is an intentional untruthfulness. A mistake is a claim that turns out to be wrong.


Perhaps I give Icemania too much credit here. I assumed he knew what he was writing, and on reflection this is probably not the case.

Looking at the depth of thought and attention to detail in his posts - you're probably right. I was unfair in calling his inaccuracies and fabrications "lies". I retract that statement. I erred in giving Icemania undue credit.




Darkspire -> RE: Change publishers (2/21/2014 10:07:32 PM)

Lock in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... [8|]

Darkspire




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625