BREAKING NEWS: EX-TROIKA CRPG IN MAKING

[J.E. Sawyer]

No, because the retail pricing can be lower than the DD costs. If that is so I really wonder how somebody comes up with a 20% winst marge for the shop...

If a specific developer chooses to make a direct download at a cost you feel is unreasonable, what does that have to do with me? The cost for the developer/publisher is almost always going to be lower to do DD instead of putting it through retail.

[Hassat Hunter]

If a specific developer chooses to make a direct download at a cost you feel is unreasonable, what does that have to do with me?  The cost for the developer/publisher is almost always going to be lower to do DD instead of putting it through retail.

 

With the price-difference between Retail and DD (which is next to none) I am really starting to doubt those statements before that $10-12,- of every $50,- of a game (20%) is for the retailer, and not Dev/Pub.

 

If that is infact the truth, keeping the prices the same with DD doesn't make devs credible when saying they get such a small stake and the rest taking so much...

 

If a dev claims he gets 2% of that 50,- then want's to directly ship me that game for $50,- I feel cheated...not by the shop/prod. but by said developers...

Especially if that $50,- gives a smaller package (namely none) than when I buy iy in the stores...

Edited May 9, 2006 by Hassat Hunter

[J.E. Sawyer]

With the price-difference between Retail and DD (which is next to none) I am really starting to doubt those statements before that $10-12,- of every $50,- of a game (20%) is for the retailer, and not Dev/Pub.

Okay, so how do retailers make money? Since you're doubting what we're saying, you must have a theory that explains why a retailer would take video game boxes and put them on their shelves for months at a time.

 

If a dev claims he gets 2% of that 50,- then want's to directly ship me that game for $50,- I feel cheated...not by the shop/prod. but by said developers...

I work for Obsidian Entertainment, not Valve.

[Hassat Hunter]

Okay, so how do retailers make money?  Since you're doubting what we're saying, you must have a theory that explains why a retailer would take video game boxes and put them on their shelves for months at a time.

 

To make money. Kind of obvious. But then claiming that it is such a big stake yet not give any of that to the costumer back when he decides to skip that part makes it hypocrytical. I know OE haven't done online shipping like that, nor did Troika (but they (under a new name) will do so now) but if devs make such statements and then several (like all) other devs who do ship online and still ask the full charge (+shop profit) you cannot do anything but doubt those devs who make such statements.

 

I work for Obsidian Entertainment, not Valve.

 

[Kaftan Barlast]

I was about to make a list of all the benefits of DD vs. Retail from a developers viewpoint but it would get so long that its useless. For the Developer, as with anyone who makes anything, getting your product to the consumer without meddling middle men is always a good thing. Im noit even going to begin with the whole mess about licensing, IP, publishing contracts etc.

 

compare

 

Developer>Publisher>Distributor>Retailer>You

 

with:

 

Developer>You

Edited May 9, 2006 by Kaftan Barlast

[Spider]

I actually forgot to mention Oblivion's AWESUM online deals. But this post reminded me to them again.

 

Both on price and why downloading can screw ya is inside this Oblivion "Plugins" debacle...

 

You still didn't answer the question I ask. how is it more work downloading a game than going to a store and buying it?

 

As for the pricing, Dhruin already answered that question in a previous reply to me. Apparently retailers refuse to sell games if a publisher/developer is selling the game cheaper through DD. I'm guessing this is large chains like EBGames or Walmart. Physical sales is still by far the largest percentage so not having your game on the shelves is a bad thing.

 

(remember here that I actually agree with you on the pricing, a DD game should be cheaper than a physical copy).

 

Edit: Also, this company is hardly Troika. It's one guy from Troika starting his own company. maybe a few of the Troika fellows are with him, but I've seen no mention of the more well known ones. He was an artist on ToEE so I don't think he had much to do with the crappy code in that game (nor did he have that much to do with VtM)

Edited May 9, 2006 by Spider

[Hassat Hunter]

You still didn't answer the question I ask. how is it more work downloading a game than going to a store and buying it?

 

If it would just work none at all...

EDIT: Oh, perhaps searching for the game you wan't. In the stores all games might be in a corner but for online you need to seek those several different pages. Probably the same amount of effort (small) as finding the shops inside town, but some of the less known sites might take a long search then if you wan't a game from it...

 

But certain copy protection and security things can really mess it up (see Oblivion).

 

Also from a POV that is timedependant it probably is easier to go to retail. Getting downtown, buying a game and being home in 15 min, install 5 min and you game in 20 min (2 DVD's). See that happen with a internet connection over here...

Edited May 9, 2006 by Hassat Hunter

[Dark_Raven]

forgive us for being blunt, but we suspect that many of the folks 'gainst download games is simply the deadbeats that can't get no credit card necessary to be purchasing games on-line.

 

ok, go back to your bickering.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have nothing against downloading games, my preference is to buy them in the store on a nice CD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?sh...71entry614471

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I do not have the time or inclination to write it on a CD. But thanks for the pointers.

[Llyranor]

Yeah, I mean, that doesn't just take 5 min.

[Spider]

You still didn't answer the question I ask. how is it more work downloading a game than going to a store and buying it?

 

If it would just work none at all...

 

But certain copy protection and security things can really mess it up (see Oblivion).

 

Also that is from a POV that is timedependant it probably is easier to go to retail. Getting downtown, buying a game and being home in 15 min, install 5 min and you game in 20 min (2 DVD's). See that happen with a internet connection over here...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ah, but I'm in Sweden. We have good connections. It'd take me 30 minutes to get to the closest gaming store and back if I'm lucky with public transports and I'd definitely download a game in less than that (again, assuming their upload matches my capacity for downloading). People on crappy DSL-lines aren't exactly the target audience for downloadable games.

 

As for messy copy protections, that can happen with physical copies as well. There are plenty of people that haven't been able to play their physical copies due to copy protection. How does Oblivion's (online protection) work though? Considering they had virtually no protection on the retail version (at least no name protection like Starforce or Securom).

[Hassat Hunter]

Ah, but I'm in Sweden. We have good connections. It'd take me 30 minutes to get to the closest gaming store and back if I'm lucky with public transports and I'd definitely download a game in less than that (again, assuming their upload matches my capacity for downloading). People on crappy DSL-lines aren't exactly the target audience for downloadable games.

 

Well, we can have fast connections here; but if you only use the net for browsing (not that often), checking mail and blasting some people's head of once in a while in a online game you really don't need the fastest connection. It would be a shame if that was needed just for DL'ing games I can already buy now anyway and let all that speed go to waste since I never use it anyway... +$ in the times I do not buy games

The biggest DL I did (1.8 gig... had to redo that 3x due to a corrupted seeder (another reason what can go wrong if you DL) took me 2.5 hours (each time)... and that was because I had a temp boost in speed during that time...

And well, the shops are pretty close here, like I said; 15 min back and fort (including browsing the shops for what you wan't)

 

As for messy copy protections, that can happen with physical copies as well. There are plenty of people that haven't been able to play their physical copies due to copy protection. How does Oblivion's (online protection) work though? Considering they had virtually no protection on the retail version (at least no name protection like Starforce or Securom).

 

Don't know, haven't bought them (too expensive; not enough content). But I do know it is raining complains of people who cannot install these things after paying for them...

[Dhruin]

Yeah, but it's TROIKA. Would you trust them with an online download (PoR2 remember)... besides that they never get themselves a producer in their entire lifetime; there should be a reason for that... and as all the other suppliers at Steam can get a retail... We shall see if this steam stuff makes their programming code better, but untill they proved that I remain sceptic and certainly wouldn't do something as pre-order or buy within the first 3 months...

And (Fear pro-download folks) IF this game is as buggy as all the other Troika stuff a LOT of support for Download above Producer is probably lost...

 

I simply can't understand some of your points, I'm sorry. I assume there is a language barrier. Would I trust Troika? Yes. I have all three of their games and have enjoyed each of them to different extents. Vampire is my favourite game of recent years. I understand many, many people feel differently.

 

But so what? This isn't Troika. This is an artist who used to work for Troika.

 

I haven't a clue what PoR has to do with it - that wasn't made by Troika. Or do you just mean buggy games in general? If so, what does that have to do with DD?

 

What do you mean by "they never get themselves a producer in their entire lifetime"?

 

In the sense that they picture stores and producers as big greedy tieves while being worse ones themselves...

Not a good looking picture...

 

I think I understand what you are saying, although I utterly disagree.

 

Your position is that since retailers make ~20%, the DD developer should always charge at least 20% less or else they are "stealing" the retailer's margin...is that your position?

 

I understand that people feel the price for DD should be lower than retail. The simple fact is that Walmart and others make that impossible for many titles, so I guess you exercise your own choice and choose to buy retail for some titles if that bothers you. That simply can't change in the current market. Eventually DD will overtake retail and the balance will shift - we'll see what happens then.

 

As far as the retailer cut, the whole point of the developer using DD is that they get such a small part of the current pie that they are looking for ways to go direct to market so they make more money. You will probably think that is stealing but have a look at the number of developers who close or get bought by a publisher because they have no other way of going forward.

 

Ever complained there is little creativity or innovation in games? I have - and part of it is because the whole dev-publisher-retail relationship splits the income and changes the focus. Retailers don't care if a game is good, creative, innovative or anything else -- they just want to sell as many boxes as possible and don't care what is in it. If Barbie: My Little Horse was the only game that sold, that's all Walmart would keep and publishers would turn their attention to only making Barbie games.

 

Now, put yourself in McCarthy's shoes. You don't want to make Barbie (or whatever) -- you have a passion to make a certain type of niche game. And you know it is a niche and retail won't be interested. But you believe there are 50,000 players who are fans of this sort of game and are crying out for this genre, so you take the risk of putting your savings into this idea.

 

Should he just stay home and not bother because his idea doesn't suit Walmart?

 

That extra money they make from DD makes it viable in the first place. It isn't stealing the retailer's margin - it's allowing games to be made that might not otherwise exist. Even for games that also have retail copies, the extra money might allow the developer to be more creative in the future. You don't have to be interested in supporting that but the stealing concept is way off-base.

[Spider]

Don't know, haven't bought them (too expensive; not enough content). But I do know it is raining complains of people who cannot install these things after paying for them...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Too expensive? $2 isn't exactly that much. I'll admit that the horse armor mod is pretty crap, but the other two at least seem interesting. I may even get the orrery one myself (not playing enough of amagic user to have much use of the other one).

[Hassat Hunter]

I haven't a clue what PoR has to do with it - that wasn't made by Troika.  Or do you just mean buggy games in general?  If so, what does that have to do with DD?

 

Remember that fun installer for that game... that is what I fear

 

What do you mean by "they never get themselves a producer in their entire lifetime"?

 

That the Troika's verbally abused enough producers that the likeliness of any of them wanting to work with Troika's again is very close near 0%

 

Your position is that since retailers make ~20%, the DD developer should always charge at least 20% less or else they are "stealing" the retailer's margin...is that your position?

 

No, but they SHOULD compensate a part of the profit they make. -10% for 20% retailer profit seems nice to me; but even that is NOT given... no wonder alot of people buy it rather in the story then, with the added stuff for the same price...

 

That extra money they make from DD makes it viable in the first place.  It isn't stealing the retailer's margin - it's allowing games to be made that might not otherwise exist.  Even for games that also have retail copies, the extra money might allow the developer to be more creative in the future.  You don't have to be interested in supporting that but the stealing concept is way off-base.

 

Yeah. But the point is the amount of extra money. To take McCarthy words a current shopped game needs 2 million copies to sell for $50 to make profit. With DD and $30 it only needs 200K copies. But DD doens't cost $30. Let's say the upkeep of the server and such costs $10 per copy (alot more than is likely). Thus they make $20 of a copy. NOW since they sell it for $50 they get $40. Thus have to sell 100K copies (And since the upkeep of $10 is WAY too high likely even lower like 75K). If it only takes so few copies to make profit why is million seller Half-Life2 $50 at retail (launch) for source? Why do they wan't additional cash for CS/DM and other additional that is basically mods (do we hear Bethesda influence?)? Sure, a dev. gets more cash this way, we all agree on that. BUT if these devs start parading against shops and prod. with such numbers (2 million VS. 200K at 20 dollar lower) why do we still have to pay that cash. Even though it *MAY* not be it does make these devs look like greedy basterds. If the excuse is "we need to sell it retail too" why? The amount of sold is so much lower that is not really needed, is it? Despite the internet-selling stuff being in it's shoes you probably find loads of sellers IF your game has quality. Darwania has proved us that...

 

Too expensive? $2 isn't exactly that much. I'll admit that the horse armor mod is pretty crap, but the other two at least seem interesting. I may even get the orrery one myself (not playing enough of  amagic user to have much use of the other one).

 

Yeah; too expensive. Especially when looking at the content. I still haven't touched the MQ of Oblivion and I doubt I will even look at this stuff after I payed my $2 for...

 

Anyways; I call it a night. 1:30AM and have to get up early...

[metadigital]

... [C]laiming that it is such a big stake yet not give any of that to the costumer back when he decides to skip that part makes it hypocrytical. I know OE haven't done online shipping like that, nor did Troika (but they (under a new name) will do so now) but if devs make such statements and then several (like all) other devs who do ship online and still ask the full charge (+shop profit) you cannot do anything but doubt those devs who make such statements.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BW, are you suggesting that the retailers don't take approximately 20% of the RRP as revenue (n.b. not profit)? I would challenge you to run any (non-virtual) business with margins of less than 20% on products. You will be very successful, should you be able to pull that off. Trust me. Or don't: go out and try it.

Your position is that since retailers make ~20%, the DD developer should always charge at least 20% less or else they are "stealing" the retailer's margin...is that your position?

No, but they SHOULD compensate a part of the profit they make. -10% for 20% retailer profit seems nice to me; but even that is NOT given... no wonder alot of people buy it rather in the story then, with the added stuff for the same price...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you understand the limits of retail selling for wholesalers? (Hint: no. Okay, read on and I'll give you another hint.)

 

Also, you are VERY PREMATURE in your adjudication of the direct-download market: it is definitely still in the VERY EARLY stages; make no mistake that this chief aspect (cost) of the marketing WILL be used to highlight the differentiation.

Yeah. But the point is the amount of extra money. To take McCarthy words a current shopped game needs 2 million copies to sell for $50 to make profit. With DD and $30 it only needs 200K copies. But DD doens't cost $30.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mmm. Good, solid figures.

Let's say the upkeep of the server and such costs $10 per copy (alot more than is likely).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excellent research.

Thus they make $20 of a copy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course! There are NO OTHER COSTS! The company doesn't have any expenses, liabilities, and no equity to repay. They just turned up and had a brand new game with 35 GotY awards. Your wet finger-in-the-air figures are as rubbery as a super-ball.

NOW since they sell it for $50 they get $40. Thus have to sell 100K copies (And since the upkeep of $10 is WAY too high likely even lower like 75K). If it only takes so few copies to make profit why is million seller Half-Life2 $50 at retail (launch) for source? Why do they wan't additional cash for CS/DM and other additional that is basically mods (do we hear Bethesda influence?)?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mods?

 

Are you talking about episodic content? Certainly this content wouldn't exist if it was necessary to rely on the established publisher-retailer chain, alone. (Read this bit slowly.) This is too expensive for high-risk, art enterprises, like game development.

Sure, a dev. gets more cash this way, we all agree on that. BUT if these devs start parading against shops and prod. with such numbers (2 million VS. 200K at 20 dollar lower) why do we still have to pay that cash. Even though it *MAY* not be it does make these devs look like greedy basterds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, it doesn't. Your perspective is ... unusual, and not shared by the vast majority of free- and right-thinking people.

If the excuse is "we need to sell it retail too" why?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Because otherwise the retailers won't sell their product. (That's right: another hint there for you.)

The amount of sold is so much lower that is not really needed, is it? Despite the internet-selling stuff being in it's shoes you probably find loads of sellers IF your game has quality. Darwania has proved us that...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Listen to the prevalent opinion RIGHT HERE on this forum: most people want a little shiny circular piece of plastic and colourful paper and cardboard with squiggles on it, despite the cheaper and easier option (apart from you and your peculiar country: most (>60%) of Britain, for example, are already broadband greater than 2Mbps); which makes sense, because changing the habit of a marketplace is non-trivial.

 

Just to clarify why your points sound like the rabid rantings of a hospital inmate: Half-Life 2:Episode 1 is available for pre-load (i.e. pull the download off-peak at the end-users' convenience) and pre-purchase for 10% discount.

 

Further, you seem to be claiming intimate knowledge of the financial statements of developers in general and VALVe in particular: as if you can make blunt statements about their liquidity, even (in the case of VALVe) after they have been developing a game for OVER FIVE YEARS and have had to make a settlement with their former publishers ... yet, despite all this, games provided on the Steam distribution mechanism have the 10% discount you think is acceptable.

 

You are sounding more confused than anything ...

[Dark_Raven]

Your quotes are broken Meta, thus making it hard to read.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

No, it's meta that's broken.

[metadigital]

You all can notice the names in italics, below? That means I am editing.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

But your shame will live on in our memories.

[themadhatter114]

Why would developers charge less for direct download than retailers charge in stores? They develop a game in order to sell it and to make money. If market conditions show that $50 is the optimum price for developer profits, then they will charge that. It's mainly for people that are just too lazy to go to the store, or who are just fascinated by their high speed connection.

 

However, these arguments have no relevance to games that are not available in stores. Direct download isn't helpful for developers to save money that they then pass onto the consumers. It's helpful for them to maximize profits. Why would they then give those profits to consumers when consumers are willing to pay them the price they want?

[alanschu]

The pricing often isn't $50 for DD - have a look at the games available

 

Just for you I checked the Steam store (from the get steam here link). Can't say I call 30,- for an expansion, $10 for original Half-Life, $30,- for Half-Life2 less expensive than in the stores. Quite the opposite...

Not a single new game has a price listing there either; only older ones. And I mean $10 to play deathmatch ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The expansion for Half-Life 2 is only $20, not $30.

 

And what do you consider a "new" game? Red Orchestra is not even two months old yet.

[alanschu]

Why would developers charge less for direct download than retailers charge in stores?  They develop a game in order to sell it and to make money.  If market conditions show that $50 is the optimum price for developer profits, then they will charge that.  It's mainly for people that are just too lazy to go to the store, or who are just fascinated by their high speed connection.

 

However, these arguments have no relevance to games that are not available in stores.    Direct download isn't helpful for developers to save money that they then pass onto the consumers.  It's helpful for them to maximize profits.  Why would they then give those profits to consumers when consumers are willing to pay them the price they want?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I declare you interim champion of the internets.

[Jumjalum]

I strongly disliked the idea of Steam when I first heard about it. I tolerated it with some vitriol when Half-Life 2 was installing. Now I have zero problems with it. It costs less to buy from Steam than in a store (moreso if you live in the UK) and I know the money goes straight to the developers, aside from a small percentage for Valve, which makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. I don't really care about manuals anymore as most games include tutorials which tend to be more enjoyable than a reading exercise. As a bonus I could lose my CDs and computer in a freak volcano accident and I'd be able to reinstall everything from another PC. There are some things which are definitely concerning such as BF2's multitude of expansions, which will really mess up server lists, and Oblivion's overpriced horse armour...which just sucks really but overall I'm ready for the future of software delivery so long as the prices stay lower.

[Judge Hades]

How would you instal the game on another PC if heir servers are down?

[Spider]

Of course! There are NO OTHER COSTS! The company doesn't have any expenses, liabilities, and no equity to repay. They just turned up and had a brand new game with 35 GotY awards. Your wet finger-in-the-air figures are as rubbery as a super-ball.

 

Oh come on, this is not what he meant and you know it. Each game sold makes the company $20 once moving costs are deducted. The only fault here is that server costs aren't exactly a moving cost, unless they pay soly for the bandwidth. He acknowledges in the next part you quoted that a game needs to sell a certain number of copies before turning a profit. It's just easier to do the math if you deduct the moving costs first.

 

Just to clarify why your points sound like the rabid rantings of a hospital inmate: Half-Life 2:Episode 1 is available for pre-load (i.e. pull the download off-peak at the end-users' convenience) and pre-purchase for 10% discount.

 

And if I don't want to pre-purchase, but would rather wait a few days to read reviews to see if it's actually worth getting at all, do I still get the discount? Isn't this just an attempt to lower server stress once it goes online? Sure, a discount is a discount, but even so this is actually beside the point. Since the discount is an incentive to pre-order, not a reflection of lowered costs for the consumer due to it being downloadable content. Will Episode 1 even have a physical counterpart?

 

Why would developers charge less for direct download than retailers charge in stores?  They develop a game in order to sell it and to make money.  If market conditions show that $50 is the optimum price for developer profits, then they will charge that.  It's mainly for people that are just too lazy to go to the store, or who are just fascinated by their high speed connection.

 

I'm neither to lazy to go to the store or just fascinated by my high speed connection. I just prefer digital media over physical for a lot of reasons. Game boxes and cds makes my desk messy and from an evironmental perspective it's also very wasteful. But it's mainly the mess part.

 

However, these arguments have no relevance to games that are not available in stores.    Direct download isn't helpful for developers to save money that they then pass onto the consumers.  It's helpful for them to maximize profits.  Why would they then give those profits to consumers when consumers are willing to pay them the price they want?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But that's just it. I'm not willing to pay the price they want, and apparently neither is HH. Again, if my actions help a developer to make more money, I expect some reward for it as well. If by downloading a game I reduce costs for packaging and distribution, I expect to see my price lowered as well. And this doesn't at all take into account the fact that the game developer may not even be reliant on a publisher that takes a large percentage of the profits which they otherwise would have been.

 

But let's use the numbers McCarthy himself posted. When using a publisher, a developer will get $3 per game sold. If releasing through Steam at the same price they get $50 (remember, Steam is free if you license Source). So through my actions I am making $47 for that developer. I don't see why the developer is the only one who should benefit from this, especially since I don't get a physical copy in my hand (although I prefer digital copies, a physical one does represent money spent on the physical material).

 

I know the argumentation doesn't quite hold up since the Steam model will allow for the creation of games that would otherwise never see the light of day, band a game that caters to my exact interests is of course worth paying more for than other games. And also, the need for a publisher will still exist since someone has to pay for the making of a game and that model assumes the publisher is bypassed entirely. But the core of it remains.

 

Edit:

 

How would you instal the game on another PC if heir servers are down?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Since he said if his house was swalloved by a volcano... How would a guy with only the physical copy install the game on another PC at all?

Edited May 10, 2006 by Spider