Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (испанский Лат. Ам.)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
Тема закреплена. Скорее всего, здесь есть важная информация. 
Правила обсуждений
83 
Пожаловаться
That's very interesting. I wish other studios would start thinking like this. Yeah, the people who are going to buy it would rather pay to have it on steam anyway.
So the advantage to you would be quicker bug fixes, improved engine and a potentially larger audience- I assume you would need the base game in order to play the mods.
For the mods, they would get an engine and a base of 50,000 users plus, and be able to make money on their mods.
Interesting idea.
I just wonder if you could come up with a way to have a bit of a best of both worlds- idea a and b. In other words spend some time splitting the code up into modules, rather than releasing it as a single dll. That way if someone mods something, it's easier to implement downstream, and it would be easier to find your way around the code. Also Proper documentation would also be a huge plus.
The only disadvantage I can think of is that b) is a bit more overwhelming to the casual modder. So you may find greater team support, but less fan/individual support. Fewer mods, but perhaps a slightly better quality.
The more people is able to mod this with the less effort by your side, the faster the game will grow, and the longer it'll last.
Games like Diablo 2, The Elder Scrolls, Minecraft, Terraria, SPAZ, etc. have much bigger followings because of community driven content and consumer faith in the company. These games will still sell copies years down the road ( As Diablo 2 and TES are a perfect example), because there are people that keep creating content for the game, long after the devs have moved on.
It also helps create good faith in the company, as they are seen being able to trust their players with their game. Nothing breeds more long lasting bonds than being able to share in the creative process of enjoying a common entertainment/project.
I personally always take a much more interested look into companies that dont treat their customers like fellons. Giving is the gift that keeps on giving.
Personally i dont care about mods and i really doubt that mods bring revenue to a game company.
Modding community might be big, but they are not of the paying type so from a business point of view they dont mean much.
A person that bought the game might or might not try mods, but i strongly doubt that someone would buy the base game for the sole purpose of playing a mod.
Usually companies open their code to modders only after they have achieved their target revenues and after they dont want to continue developing the game themselves, so they throw it to modders.
Removing the harmless drm was a bad idea, you are just giving in to noise makers, and they are not buyers, they are just noise makers.
So many loud voices said they would buy the game if there was no drm, how many copies you sold since you removed the drm?
They just wanted the game for free and now they probably got it.
I agree with you, I also don't play mods and I think that the whole DRM controversy was exagerated mostly by "noise markers".
Removing DRM had zero impact on our sales. My explanation:
- real customers never cared about DRM
- pirates wouldn't buy the game anyway
The downside of DRM was that people started to perceive us and the game very negatively. First few weeks it was just about DRM and nothing about the game and that's wrong. And then every reviewer didn't forget to mention that we have "always online DRM and how wrong it is"
The reasons why we consider opening source code:
- we want to increase the value of Miner Wars 2081 for existing and new customers
- we are expecting that some of them will actually want to play with the source code (study it, tweak it, etc) - this would be their primary reason to take an interest in our game (just imagine if you had a full source code for you favorite game and would be able to change little things here and there).
- we are really currious where will this thing go and what can we learn from it
BTW, we are not giving up with Miner Wars. We don't talk about our future plans anymore, but I can say one thing - Miner Wars is not over yet.
Please let us know what do you think, etc.
I'm just going to say, I bought the Arma 2 collection JUST to try out DayZ (A player made mod) And i believe many others have too, so Bohemia made a profit from me any whoever else bought their game just to try out the mod. Though i only played 1 session, but still :p
I do agree with this. A thief sees no value in buying something that can be stolen. It's good that there is a game company that knows these things.
[/quote]
This is actually brilliant. The idea your game runs on is perfect for this sort of thing, and by letting people mod it, you are unlocking its full potential. When a person makes a new game, they will definitely say you helped, and that means more customers for you. It worked for Valve. It will work for you.
EDIT: I screwed up the quote tags.
I hope this is not taken the wrong way, but if you look at the controversy behind the recent SimCity release with it's own always online DRM and purely multiplayer with no single player playability, you might understand people will always dislike DRM's, but i'm glad it's gone for this, i believe i bought this game near the initial launch and played 3-4times and stopped. hopefully i can get back into it again.