Third xpac?

[Hurlshort]

I don't think WotC would care one way or the other. There aren't any other D&D PC games coming down the pipeline for it to compete with.

[Pop]

As you can see from the Obsidz section of the forum, George Ziets has cast his shadow over SoCal once again.

 

If his resume is any indication, he could be working on the far-flung fantasy RPG Obsidz has cooking, but he could very well be working on Aliens or AP. But wouldn't it be nice to have another Ziets-helmed xpac?

[Mamoulian War]

If Atari, and Obsidian still feel that a NWN2 expansion is profitable enough to make it worthwhile than, darn right, they would.

 

Atari might think it still might be profitable, but does Obsidian? I think Obsidian is better off either making their own IPs or non-DnD products, much like Bioware has done.

 

And then sell to EA because they spent to much cash for making Mass Effect? No thank you...

 

SOU was the worst NWN official campaign... until SOZ came along, and took that mantle.

 

 

"Devs get paid by the publishers for hitting milestones. Sometimes even upfront."

 

They get paid developmental costs which they then have to pay back with their royalties from the sales (their share) before they get 'free money'. Of course, it all depends on the actual contract.

 

You would be surprised how many people would disagree with your opinnion here...

Edited January 14, 2009 by Mamoulian War

[Morgoth]

Normally, I'm against a NX3 (hey, after the horrible SoZ you can't blame me), but now that we learned that George Ziets is back in the trenches, I wanna see a follow up to MotB. It's story needs to be finished.

 

MotB 2 anyone?

[Meshugger]

Normally, I'm against a NX3 (hey, after the horrible SoZ you can't blame me), but now that we learned that George Ziets is back in the trenches, I wanna see a follow up to MotB. It's story needs to be finished.

 

MotB 2 anyone?

 

I think that the whole MotB mythos is pretty much done. I would rather have another expansion with the same quality as MotB though.

[Tigranes]

How was MOTB story not finished?

 

And I doubt Obsidian would like working on it again. The engine is about as screwed up as FO3 Harold now, and probably couldn't take any more additional functionalities. Tehy've done a massive campaign, a story-focused campaign and an exploration campaign. There's nothing screaming 'make me'.

 

I mean, I'd love another Ziets story. But with MoW coming up (I hope), I'm sure Obs will move on.

[Morgoth]

Yeh, they probably will move on. Perhaps George will be the lead writer on that next rumoured fantasy RPG?

[Guard Dog]

Have all of you considered that it may be subbed out? If Obsidian passes on another expansion because they have too many projects, it could easily be subbed out to a small studio like DLA or Ossian. For NWN2 the heavy lifting is essentially done now, a smaller team could pull off a small scale (SoZ sized) expansion with a little new content thrown in.

[Wombat]

Some may be interested in reading this interview at Iron Tower, which sheds some light on "capitalism" behind extension making.

 

IMHO, I'd rather have a full story-focused game rather than expansions.

[Hurlshort]

Great link, Wombat. That was very informative, particularly the part where it was stated more risks can be taken on an expansion than a full title.

[aries101]

Kevin Saunders wrote:

 

To be blunt, one practical consideration is that, typically, each expansion has a smaller financial budget than the original title and than previous expansions. "But wait," you may say, "I pay the same for expansions/games made with smaller budgets? That's not fair."No, it's not. It's also not fair that developers and publishers get no $ from used game sales or game rentals. It's part of how capitalism works, which is, incidentally, one of the themes in Storm of Zehir.

 

While it may not be fair that developers and publishers do not get any $$$ from used game sales or game rentals. Writers and carmakers do not get any money fromthe re-sale of their books or cars as well. Also, I fail to see how this is somehow related to the way capitalism works and how it is related to setting up trade routes in Storm of Zehir.

 

Edit:

 

I thought that for a full game you would pay 50 US dollars or so, and for an expansion you would pay like 20-25 US dollars? Not the full price. I didn't know that for each expansion, you would get less money to make the expansion. This means that the publishers, not the developers earn money? now, doesn't it?

Edited January 14, 2009 by aries101

[Gfted1]

What on gods green earth makes him think they deserve money from used game sales and rentals? Its already been paid for per copy so he feels they deserve to get to re-sell it every time? Wow.

[Pidesco]

The idea is that a used game is exactly as good as a new game, while, say, a used car is a lot worse than a new car.

[kirottu]

The idea is that a used game is exactly as good as a new game, while, say, a used car is a lot worse than a new car.

 

CDs and DVDs do "degenerate" over time too.

 

Frankly, I

[Gfted1]

The idea is that a used game is exactly as good as a new game, while, say, a used car is a lot worse than a new car.

 

 

But Im not talking about depreciation. Lets say Blockbuster (movie & game rental chain in U.S.) bought 5000 copies of for distribution to their various locations. They paid for those 5000 units so why should ALSO profit from anothers business model? You know, thats part of how capitalism works.

[Hurlshort]

I doubt the rental market is as much of a concern from a business standpoint, since companies like Blockbuster and Hollywood Video are buying large quantities of games to rent out, helping to meet sales goals.

 

I can see both sides of the secondhand argument. On one hand, you own the game, finish it, and should be able to trade it in for cash or towards the purchase of another game. I expect most folks trade in for credit towards new titles, which makes it economically helpful for everyone involved.

 

However, most stores sell secondhand copies of newer titles for like $10 cheaper than a new game. That's a bit of a slap in the face for the developers and publishers. Game stores are making a huge profit, customers are saving a tiny amount, and the companies are left out of the loop entirely.

[Gfted1]

...and the companies are left out of the loop entirely.

 

As it should be IMO. They provided a service and were paid for it. Why do they deserve to get paid in perpetuity?

[Pop]

Because they made the game? If you think that buying a game means you "own" it you've never really paid much attention to your games. For just about every game you've ever installed on your computer, before you're allowed to install, you are required to acknowledge a ream of text as having been read and agreed to. That ream of text is your list of rights as a buyer of the game, of which there are relatively few, and that agreement is binding. Just because you ignore it does not mean it never happened, it just means you're dishonest. Game companies could very well prohibit secondhand sale if they had the means and the will, of which they have little. That does not mean you're within your rights to participate in it. If game companies were interested in selling you the license to their game, they'd be charging you much, much more.

[Hurlshort]

It's not that I think they should get paid a second time, it's that I don't think the game store should be making such an immense profit off of the resale. I'd be happier to see some sort of limit on second hand game prices. But I guess that's all about supply and demand.

 

This also comes down to consumer education. If I buy a used car, I'm looking it up on Blue Book and figuring out what I should be paying. I'm not going to take the sticker price of the dealer, because they have marked it up over what they bought it for ridiculously. We don't have that option in a game store, we are expected to follow their guidelines.

 

I never buy a used game unless it is significantly cheaper than the new copy (or the new is unavailable.) I'd rather spend the extra $10 to support the publisher/developer in a more direct fashion. And I like the new game smell.

[Gfted1]

Because they made the game? If you think that buying a game means you "own" it you've never really paid much attention to your games. For just about every game you've ever installed on your computer, before you're allowed to install, you are required to acknowledge a ream of text as having been read and agreed to. That ream of text is your list of rights as a buyer of the game, of which there are relatively few, and that agreement is binding. Just because you ignore it does not mean it never happened, it just means you're dishonest. Game companies could very well prohibit secondhand sale if they had the means and the will, of which they have little. That does not mean you're within your rights to participate in it. If game companies were interested in selling you the license to their game, they'd be charging you much, much more.

 

Yes, yes, weve all seen the EULA. Do you honestly think these are being rented out by big chains without a license? So what they are really pissing and moaning about is the miniscule slice they dont get from individuals and low volume game stores that resell used games. It no different from trying to charge you every time you reinstall a game.

[Tigranes]

If you think that buying a game means you "own" it you've never really paid much attention to your games

 

Yet that's how it SHOULD work. We are experiencing a conscious and concerted effort on the part of the industry to change this mindset that if you buy it you SHOULD own it, and that's a load of crap. If Kevin is basing his argument on that (and he may not be), then I call it rubbish.

 

Pop, the letter of the law is very different from what actually happens in the market, what people expect and what can be enforced. But when we ignore who made the law or why the law is there and just decide to follow it, that's when the law is properly realised. And, depending on the law, that's a bad thing.

[Volourn]

"you are required to acknowledge a ream of text as having been read and agreed to. That ream of text is your list of rights as a buyer of the game, of which there are relatively few, and that agreement is binding."

 

No. EULAs are not the law. This is why companies don't usually drag people into court for 'breaking' them because they know a good part of the EULA would be laughed out of court.

[Rhomal]

Have all of you considered that it may be subbed out? If Obsidian passes on another expansion because they have too many projects, it could easily be subbed out to a small studio like DLA or Ossian. For NWN2 the heavy lifting is essentially done now, a smaller team could pull off a small scale (SoZ sized) expansion with a little new content thrown in.

 

DLA? Please thats laughable. Plus they have more or less washed their hands of NWN2 since they couldn't make such inroads behind the scenes to obsidian as they did with bioware.

 

That aside I do agree it would be interesting to see what ossian aka codi would have for ideas (I feel the writers for codi were far superior then those of and other community group excluding certain indiv. folk)

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Do NWN 2's expansion packs really sell that well?

[Wombat]

Do NWN 2's expansion packs really sell that well?

Indeed. Don't forget about the market. You, as a consumer, may spend the same amount of money but the sale is decided also by how many of consumers spend money. In order to make profit, it is quite natural for the publishers to assume that expansions won't sell better than the original game and spend less on the cost.

 

DLA? Please thats laughable. Plus they have more or less washed their hands of NWN2 since they couldn't make such inroads behind the scenes to obsidian as they did with bioware.

 

That aside I do agree it would be interesting to see what ossian aka codi would have for ideas (I feel the writers for codi were far superior then those of and other community group excluding certain indiv. folk)

I didn't have time to check it by myself but is it true that Mystery of Westgate seems to have problems in distribution process rather than the development of game itself? If it is true, then, doesn't Bioware/Obsidian have a plan to make a steam like distribution system where mod-originated Counterstrike and experimental Portal achieved a certain amount of success.

 

To reduce the cost, making a reliable distribution system and assigning job for indies may be an alternative. However, I wonder how much freedom the developers have in this area. I remember that Valve had an issue with the publisher when they released Steam. After all, I'm not a game industry insider.